Rajasthan High Court
Dinesh Kumar Son Of Late Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 February, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1502/2022
Dinesh Kumar Son Of Late Shri Chauthmal Prajapat
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : None present
For Respondent(s) : None present
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
22/02/2023
Lawyers are abstaining from appearing before this Court.
This Court is in receipt of a report sent by District and
Session Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan-II in compliance of the order
dated 13.02.2023 passed by this Court. It is intimated to this
Court via the said report that on the relevant date, i.e.
23.12.2020, one Sitaram Khowal was the Presiding Officer of the
court concerned and he has now retired from his services. Further
course of action regarding the officer named above will be
considered at a subsequent stage.
It is emanating from the record that the officer posted as
Special Judge, POCSO Act, 2012, No. 01, Jaipur Metropolitan-II on
12.07.2022 passed the judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 12.07.2022 whereby the accused was convicted
under Section 9(m)/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 and was sentenced to serve seven years
simple imprisonment along with fine without going through the
statements of the witnesses which includes the examination-in-
(2 of 3) [CRLAS-1502/2022]
chief, cross-examination and re-examination of the said witnesses.
It is apparent from a bare reading of the record that the
cross-examination of PW-1, the mother of the victim and the
complainant of the case, is not available in the file which leads to
the obvious conclusion that after her examination-in-chief was
done, the cross-examination of another witness was pasted there
mindlessly. It is a glaring defect and it is incomprehensible to this
Court as to how the learned judge considered the evidence and
reached on a judgment of conviction in the given circumstances.
There are several other flaws, however, this Court abstains from
passing any comments over those.
Normally, it is neither expected from the High Court nor is
the High Court supposed to pass comments or furnish explanation
from a presiding officer whose order/judgment is under appeal but
this is an extraordinary situation and looking to the obvious foul-
up, this Court could not refrain itself from seeking an explanation
from the presiding officer concerned since it's a matter of life and
liberty of not just this one individual who is the accused in the
present matter but it is a matter concerning several litigants who
are before his court. If he undertakes his work in such an
unscrupulous and careless manner, the impact of the same will be
borne by other litigants as well. Neither it's a rule nor a practice of
this Court to reprimand or seek clarifications from the learned
courts below but what to do when the life and liberty of individuals
are played with in such a casual and impetuous manner. When
such orders that are passed inattentively or negligently affect the
life and liberty of individuals, then, in such circumstances, this
Court feels compelled to step in and it cannot desist from taking
(3 of 3) [CRLAS-1502/2022]
required action. Of course, the matter shall be placed before
Hon'ble Chief Justice but before doing so, this Court deems it fit to
seek an explanation from the presiding officer concerned as to
how he dealt with the evidence of the case while finding the guilt
of the accused and passing the impugned judgment dated
12.07.2022 and why the same is not reflecting from his judgment.
The Registrar (Judicial) is directed to inform the concerned
Presiding Officer who passed the impugned judgment dated
12.07.2022 today itself regarding the afore-said direction through
mail/fax/phone/any other electronic communication.
List this matter on 27.02.2023.
(FARJAND ALI),J
PREETI VALECHA /61
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
