Kishan Lal vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 12231 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4548/2019

Kishan Lal S/o Shri Moda Ram, Aged About 76 Years, By Caste Kumhar, Prajapat, R/o Kumnaro Ka Mohalla, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P

2. Ram Kumar S/o Birbal Ram, By Caste Jat, R/o 3-E-47, Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, Bikaner.

3. Rajendra Prasad S/o Lal Chand, Plot No. 2, Riico Residential Colony, Bicchwal, Bikaner.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Mohsin Khan Dhera
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. S.K. Bhati, PP
                               Mr. R.S. Choudhary



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

                                Judgment

05/08/2021

The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the

petitioner-complainant Kishanlal for assailing the order dated

13.08.2019 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.3, Bikaner

in Criminal Revision No.51/15 (CIS No.93/15) whereby the

revision preferred by the respondents was accepted and the order

dated 20.03.2015 passed by learned ACJM No.3, Bikaner allowing

the application of the petitioner under Section 457 Cr.P.C. and

directing that the survey machines seized from the private

respondents by the Investigating Officer in connection with the

FIR No.41/2015 Police Station Naya Shahar, Bikaner shall be

handed over to the petitioner, was set aside and it was directed

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-4548/2019]

that the survey machines be returned to the respondents on

Supurdginama.

I have heard and considered the submissions advanced at

bar and have gone through the impugned order.

Suffice it to say that the aforesated FIR came to be lodged

by the petitioner at the Police Station Naya Shahar alleging that

he had given the survey machines in question to the respondents

on rent basis. On demand being made by the petitioner, the

respondents refused to return the same to the petitioner and

usurped them. It may be stated here that the claim of the

petitioner regarding the machines in question having been given

on rent to the respondents was found to be patently false after

investigation. The Investigating Officer found that as a matter of

fact, the machines had been given to the respondents in terms of

a transfer agreement. The IO conducted thorough investigation

into the matter and a negative final report was submitted in the

court concerned finding that no offence whatsoever was made out

from the allegations of the complainant.

In this background and as the Investigating Officer has

concluded that the respondents have not committed any offence

of breach of trust and since they were holding lawful possession of

the machines in question, there was no occasion for the learned

Magistrate to have directed return thereof to the petitioner.

Learned Magistrate made no consideration whatsoever of the

important fact that the Investigating Officer had filed a negative

final report in the case after investigation.

In this background, I am of the firm opinion that the

revisional court was absolutely justified in reversing the order of

magistrate and directing that the survey machines in question

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-4548/2019]

shall be handed over to the private respondents. As a

consequence, I find no reason to interfere in the order dated

13.08.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3,

Bikaner in Criminal Revision No.51/15 (CIS No.93/15), which does

not suffer from any infirmity, illegality or perversity warranting

interference therein. Accordingly, the misc. petition fails and is

dismissed as such.

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J 53-Sudhir Asopa/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)