Desh Raj vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:24764)
2023 Latest Caselaw 5562 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:24764]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 511/2020

Desh Raj S/o Shri Kor Chand, Aged About 65 Years, By Caste
Brahmin, R/o Village Malkana Khurd, Tehsil Sri Karanpur, District
Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State, Through P.P.
2.       Keshwa Nand S/o Shri Hazari Lal, By Caste Arora, Matili
         Rathan, Tehsil And District Sri Ganganagar.
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. G.J. Gupta
                                Mr. Nesh Gupta
For Respondent(s)          :    Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                     Order

DATE OF ORDER                           :::                      03/08/2023
BY THE COURT:-

1. By way of filing the instant criminal Revision Petition the

petitioner, who is the complainant of the case has made challenge

to the ordered dated 30.05.2018 passed by the learned Additional

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shri Karanpur District Sri Ganganagar in

Criminal Regular Case No.483/2o05 whereby the accused was

acquitted as well as to the judgment dated 12.03.2020 passed by

the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Karanpur District Sri

Ganganagar in Criminal Appeal No.31/2018 whereby the judgment

of acquittal was affirmed in appeal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned public

prosecutor for the State and have gone through the judgments of

[2023:RJ-JD:24764] (2 of 3) [CRLR-511/2020]

the Court of first instance as well as of the Court of appeal and

also have gone through the material available on record.

3. The substratum of the allegation was depending upon the

entrustment of the property for which the complainant has utterly

failed to establish the fact that he entrused a sum of

Rs.1,25,345/- to the accused and upon demand, he refused to

return the same. It is appearing that even the complainant P.W. 2

Deshraj has admitted in his evidence that the amount was not

given to the accused rather the crops were sold to him and in lieu

thereof, he was supposed to pay the amount. The fact of

entrustment and misappropriation has aptly dealt with by the

learned trial Judge and whereafter by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge. It is also noticed that after investigation, no

offence was found proved against the accused and thus a

negative final report was submitted in the competent Court

averring therein that the dispute between the parties was of civil

nature. It is upon the protest made by the petitioner the learned

Magistrate took cognizance of the offence.

4. A presumption of innocence which was already existing in

favour of the petitioner-accused had been forfeited by the result of

investigation. The said presumption got further strength by the

judgment of acquittal passed by the Court of competent

jurisdiction and the judgment of appeal made it sound again. The

Court of appeal or while making the revision reluctance should be

shown in making interference in such types of cases.

5. On perusal of the judgments and the findings arrived at by

the learned Magistrate as well as reappreciated by the learned

[2023:RJ-JD:24764] (3 of 3) [CRLR-511/2020]

Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar

and I find no reason for interference therein.

6. Thus, viewing the matter from every angle, there appears no

merit in the petition. The petitioner has failed to point out the

illegality, incorrectness or impropriety in both the judgments

under assail and, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed

and the same is hereby dismissed.

7. Record of the Courts below be sent back forthwith.

(FARJAND ALI),J 258-Mamta/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)