Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Nasir @ Nar Singh vs State
2023 Latest Caselaw 3327 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3327 Raj
Judgement Date : 20 April, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nasir @ Nar Singh vs State on 20 April, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 839/2019

Nasir @ Nar Singh

----Petitioner Versus State

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Saruparia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gourav Singh, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

20/04/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initial burden

to prove the case against the accused beyond every shadow

of doubt lies upon the prosecution. In the entire course of

trial, no endeavour was made by the prosecution to

establish the fact by adducing cogent and reasonable

evidence, either documentary or oral, to show that the place

from where the recovery of excise article was made

belonged to the petitioner.

2. The learned trial Court after meticulous appreciation of the

evidence and material available on record had acquitted the

accused. The State utterly failed to make any submissions

before the appellate Court with regard to the manifest

defects in the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned

trial Court. He further submits that in an appeal against a

judgment of acquittal, the appellate Court should be slow in

making interference unless it is shown that the judgment of

acquittal is a product of misappropriation of evidence or is

(2 of 2) [CRLR-839/2019]

passed without consideration of the material available on

record.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the

submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Considering the submissions that the learned appellate

Court has erred in setting aside the impugned order dated

12.02.2016 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Bhim, District Rajsamand in Criminal Regular

Case No.188/2009 and remanded back the matter to the

trial Court, therefore, the same is not sustainable, it is

deemed appropriate to interfere in the matter.

5. The matter requires consideration.

6. Admit.

7. The record has already been received. Put up in due course.

(FARJAND ALI),J 11-Ashutosh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter