Narendra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 8729 Raj

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
           S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 590/2022

Narendra Singh S/o Sh. Mangu Singh, Aged About 27 Years,
Aajdoli, P.s. Khunkhuna, Dist. Nagore. (At Present Confined In
Sub Jail, Didwana, Nagore).
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.      State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.      Abhishek Pilaniya S/o Ratnaram, Aged About 29 Years,
        Kotwali, Sikar, Dist. Sikar.
                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Lokesh Kumar Verma
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP



     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

                                    Order

05/07/2022

     Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken this Court to the

medical report, which shows that there are about nine injuries out

of which eight are simple in nature.                 Learned counsel further

submits that none of the weapons were used and no injuries were

dangerous to life, which is reflected in the present incident.

      Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

charges having been framed under Section 326 and 307 of IPC are

not made out. Learned counsel further submits that applying of

Section 365 and 342 IPC simultaneously also would not be

appropriate in the present case.            Learned counsel also submits

that applying Section 394 and 397 of IPC at the same time was

also an error committed by the learned trial court. Learned

counsel also submits that the statement rendered under Section


                    (Downloaded on 08/07/2022 at 08:25:46 PM)
                                                                            (2 of 2)                [CRLR-590/2022]



                                   161 Cr.P.C. were far more improved in the statement under

                                   Section 164 Cr.P.C. and thus, the concoction of facts is apparent.

                                         Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions by saying

                                   that there are nine injuries and the brutality upon the ladies is

                                   apparent and charges were also framed.

                                         Although the submissions made by the learned counsel for

                                   the petitioner on merits are forceful, but since the stage is of

                                   framing of charges and the Hon'ble Apex Court in various

                                   judgments has laid down the analogy that high probability and

                                   strong suspicion are sufficient to frame the charges, therefore,

                                   this Court at this stage is not inclined to make any interference in

                                   the present case. However, looking to the merits of the case,

                                   complete liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all the issues

                                   which have been raised before this Court, before the learned trial

                                   court and the learned trial court shall not get prejudiced by the

                                   non-entertaining of the present petition by this Court while

                                   deciding those issues.

                                           In view of the above, the present revision petition is

                                   disposed of. All pending applications also stand disposed of

                                   accordingly.

                                                                (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

44-Sudheer/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)