Sampat Lal vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 107 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5473/2021

Sampat Lal S/o Sh. Pratap, Aged About 39 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Village Barana, P.s. Asind Dist. Bhilwara (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State, Through Pp

2. Gopal Lal S/o Pratap Jat, Village Barana, P.s. Asind, Dist.

Bhilwara (Raj.).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.R. Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati, P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment

04/01/2022

This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner

being aggrieved with the order dated 28.07.2021 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gulabpura, District Bhilwara

whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been

dismissed. The said revision petition was filed by the petitioner

against the order dated 07.09.2020 passed by the Judicial

Magistrate Asind, District Bhilwara, whereby the application

preferred on behalf of the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

has been allowed and the petitioner was summoned to face trial

along with other accused persons for the offences punishable

under Sections 341, 323, 336, 427/34 in Case No.588/2017

pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Asind.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

police have not found involvement of the petitioner in the case

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-5473/2021]

and, therefore, charge-sheet was not filed against him. Learned

counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner

has falsely been implicated in this case, as he was not involved in

commission of crime in any manner. Learned counsel for the

petitioner has, therefore, prayed that the impugned orders passed

by the courts below may kindly be set aside.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the

criminal misc. petition.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The Judicial Magistrate, Asind had taken into consideration

the statements of the prosecution witnesses viz. Gopal (PW-1) and

Chanta Devi (PW-2) recorded during the course of the trial and

held that from the evidence of the said witnesses, prima facie case

is made out against the petitioner and it is a fit case where he can

be summoned to face the trial along with other co-accused

persons.

The Revisional Court has dismissed the revision petition filed

by the petitioner while holding that the trial court has not

committed any illegality in passing the impugned order.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to satisfy this

Court that the trial court has committed any jurisdictional error

while exercising powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Learned

counsel for the petitioner has also not able to make out a case

that even from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses Gopal

(PW-1) and Chanta Devi (PW-2), no case is made out against the

petitioner.

Otherwise also, though the petitioner has filed this criminal

misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. but, in fact, this is a

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-5473/2021]

second revision petition which is clearly barred as per Section

397(3) Cr.P.C.

In view of above discussions, I do not find any merit in this

criminal misc. petition. The same is therefore, dismissed.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

28-Babulal/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)