Vinod Kumar Mehra Son Of Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 4338 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

       S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4762/2022

Vinod Kumar Mehra Son Of Shri Kajodmal Mehra, Aged About 59
Years, Resident Of Kumharon Ki Naddi Ramchandra Ji Ki Chokdi,
Ramganj, Jaipur (Raj).
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
                                                                   ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Joshi for Mr. Sita Ram Joshi Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Order

30/06/2022

The petitioner is one of the accused facing trial in criminal

case No. 142/2016 arising out of FIR No. 122/2014, registered at

Police Station Kotwali, Bundi for offences under Sections 420, 408,

409, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC.

The petitioner has challenged the order framing charges

dated 01/09/2021 and 27/09/2021 passed by the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Bundi as well as the order of the Revisional

Court who did not interfere with the order framing charges. The

offence alleged in the FIR is that scholarship money of the

students was not disbursed to them rather dwindled to some

different bank accounts and the public money was mis-

appropriated by co-accused Ravi Prakash Brajawat a Computer

Operator appointed on contract. During investigation, name of the

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-4762/2022]

petitioner and others surfaced as conspirators and beneficiaries of

the dwindled money.

Orders of both the courts below would reveal that it is not a

case of no evidence. Even suspicion of commission of cognizable

offence would be a ground to prosecute anyone and the standard

to be adopted at the stage of conclusion of the trial of proof of

charge beyond reasonable doubt is not applicable.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on

judgment of the Supreme Court in case of L.Krishna Reddy vs.

State by Station House Officer & Ors. reported in (2014) 14

SCC 401; wherein allegation was of commission of dowry death

against the husband only and parents were not there at the time

of occurrence. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that prosecuting

the parents-in-law would be an exercise in futility.

Learned counsel has further relied on the judgment in case

of P. Vijayan vs. State of Kerala & Anr. Reported in (2010) 2

SCC 398; wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court said that if two

views are possible and one of them gives rise to suspicion only, as

distinguished from grave suspicion as to the guilt of the accused,

the trial Judge will be empowered to discharge the accused.

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the cases

relied by learned counsel for the petitioner are not helping.

Hence, I do not find any infirmity with the impugned orders.

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

Stay application also stands disposed of.

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J

ANIL SHARMA /91

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)