Mayank Kumar Devedi vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 5041 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1034/2022

Mayank Kumar Devedi S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Behind The Police Station, Pindwara, Tehsil And Police Station, Pindwara, Dist. Sirohi.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Kishore Puri S/o Babu Puri, B/c Goswami, R/o J.j. Colony, Pindwara, Police Station Pindwara, Dist. Sirohi.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Sikander Khan
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Anda Ram Choudhary, PP



                    JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                    Order

04/04/2022

1. By way of present petition under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought

quashment of criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.2/2022,

pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Pindwara, Sirohi pursuant to FIR No.80/2021, registered at P.S.

Pindwara, District Sirohi for the offence punishable under Section

305 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Inviting Court's attention towards the conclusion drawn by

the Investigating Officer, as recorded in the factual report, learned

counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecution has not

been able to prove that the petitioner had, in any manner,

instigated the girl to commit suicide.

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-1034/2022]

3. He argued that merely because the petitioner has got

engaged with another girl, cannot be a reason to infer or conclude

that the petitioner is, in any manner, guilty of offence under

Section 305 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that

since the Investigating Officer, after thorough investigation, has

filed a charge-sheet against the petitioner and has found that

offence punishable under Section 305 of the Indian Penal Code is

made out against the petitioner, this Court cannot re-appraise the

evidence on record and quash the proceedings, particularly when,

even the charges are yet to be framed by the trial Court.

5. In the facts of the present case, this Court does not deem it

appropriate to quash the proceedings at this stage because, even

the charges are yet to be framed by the competent Court.

6. Without pronouncing upon the petitioner's contention, the

instant petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to

raise all the grounds and cite judgments in his favour and put

forth all the submissions before the trial Court, at the stage of

framing charges.

7. This Court is sure that the trial Court shall consider the same

in accordance with law before proceeding to frame charges (if

any).

8. Needless to observe that petitioner's rights to challenge the

order framing charges shall stand reserved, as this Court has not

pronounced upon merit of petitioner's contentions.

9. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 187-skm/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)