Purushottam Shakdweepi vs Pushpendra Gaur
2021 Latest Caselaw 10452 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 386/2020

Purushottam Shakdweepi S/o Jamnashankar Shakdweepi, Aged About 61 Years, Keshav Nagar, Vinayak Residency, Udaipur (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus Pushpendra Gaur S/o Vishnu Shankar Gaur, Ahinsapuri, Fatehpura, Udaipur (Raj.).

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Deepika Purohit.

For Respondent(s)        :     -



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

                                   Judgment

09/07/2021

The accused petitioner Shri Purushottam Shakdweepi has

approached this Court by way of the instant revision for assailing

the order dated 13.02.2020 passed by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge No.5, Udaipur in Criminal Appeal No.2/2019 (filed

by the petitioner against his conviction awarded by the trial court

for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act) whereby, the

application preferred by the petitioner under Section 391 Cr.P.C.

for summoning the witnesses was dismissed.

I have heard and considered the submissions advanced by

Ms. Deepika Purohit, learned counsel representing the petitioner

and have gone through the impugned order.

On a perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that by the

subject application, the petitioner sought summoning of two

witnesses Surya Prakash and Shyamlal Dadhich for deposition at

(2 of 2) [CRLR-386/2020]

the appellate stage. The appellate court took note of the fact that

the petitioner made the same effort during the trial on two

occasions and on both occasions, the applications filed by the

petitioner were dismissed and the revisions preferred against such

dismissal were also rejected.

In this background, I am of the firm view that the repeated

efforts being made by the petitioner to summon witnesses in the

case is nothing but a malafide attempt to delay the proceedings

and as such, the same had to be repelled/ thwarted. The learned

appellate court was absolutely justified in dismissing the

application filed by the petitioner under Section 391 Cr.P.C. The

impugned order dated 13.02.2020 passed by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge No.5, Udaipur does not suffer from any

infirmity or illegality warranting interference therein.

Hence, the revision as well as stay application fail and are

hereby dismissed as being devoid of merit.

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J

33-Tikam/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)