Shriram S/O Dharam Singh vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3298 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

      S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1957/2019

1.     Shriram S/o Dharam Singh, R/o Adda Colony, Police
       Station Sewar, District Bharatpur.
2.     Satpal S/o Dharam Singh, R/o Adda Colony, Police Station
       Sewar, District Bharatpur.
3.     Dharam Singh S/o Tej Singh, R/o Adda Colony, Police
       Station Sewar, District Bharatpur.
4.     Soran Singh S/o Tej Singh, R/o Adda Colony, Police
       Station Sewar, District Bharatpur.
5.     Ravindra Singh S/o Soran Singh, R/o Adda Colony, Police
       Station Sewar, District Bharatpur.
6.     Omprakash @ Ramprakash S/o Tej Singh, R/o Adda
       Colony, Police Station Sewar, District Bharatpur.
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through PP.
2.     Nirmala Devi W/o Than Singh, R/o Adda Colony, Police
       Station Sewar, District Bharatpur.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nikhlesh Katara For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma, PP Mr. Naresh Kumar Singhal, complainant

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

25/04/2022

Learned counsel for petitioners has limited prayer and he has

challenged the order dated 03.12.2018 passed by the Additional

Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate No.1, Bharatpur, in which, the

court below, at the first instance, summoned the petitioners by

way of arrest warrants.

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-1957/2019]

Learned counsel for petitioners has relied upon the judgment

of the Apex Court in the case of Inder Mohan Goxwami & Anr.

Vs. State of Uttaranchal & Ors., in which, the Apex Court has

stated that the trial court should not summon petitioners by non-

bailable warrants at the first instance. So, the order of the learned

trial court may be modified accordingly.

Learned counsel for respondents has opposed arguments

advanced by learned counsel for petitioners.

I have considered arguments advanced by learned counsel

for the petitioners as well as counsel for respondents and perused

the impugned order.

The order of the learned trial court for summoning the

petitioners by way of arrest warrants is modified to the extent that

the trial court should summon petitioners by bailable warrants.

Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Sunita/29

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)