Amrit vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4397 Raj

[2023/RJJD/014546]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3358/2018

Amrit S/o Sh. Asharam, Aged About 49 Years, B/c Kalal, R/o Jhala Ki Chowki, Aarakshi Kendra Raipur, Dist. Pali.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Julfikar Ali, P.s. Sendra, Dist. Pali

3. Binjaram, Constable, P.s. Sendra, Dist. Pali

4. Balveer, Constable, P.s. Sendra, Dist. Pali.

                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Tejmal Ranka
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

                                      Order

10/05/2023

Instant misc. petition has been filed against the order dated

19.06.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaitaran,

District Pali whereby the learned Judge dismissed the revision

petition and affirmed the order dated 30.08.2010 passed by

learned Judicial Magistrate, Bar accepting the FR filed by the police

in FIR No. 272/2008.

Brief facts of the case are that the complainant filed a

complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bar stating

therein that since his uncle Chandmal has been falsely implicated

in criminal cases by the SHO Police Station Sendada and the

petitioner as well as his uncle Chandmal is being torturned by the

SHO Zulfikar and threatening them to get the gold chain

recovered.

[2023/RJJD/014546] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-3358/2018]

The complaint was sent to the concerned police station under

Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. upon which the police registered the case

being FIR No. 272/2008 and after investigation, submitted FR that

no case is made out against the accused respondents. After

considering the evidence collected during investigation and

recording statement of petitioner and witnesses under Section 200

& 202 Cr.P.C., the trial court accepted the Final Report and

rejected the protest petition vide order dated 30.08.2010. The

petitioner filed a revision petition against the said order before the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaitaran which too was

dismissed vide order dated 19.06.2018.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that without considering

the material aspect of the matter, the trial court mechanically

rejected the protest petition filed by the petitioner. It is argued

that on the basis of statement of the complainant, a prima facie

case is clearly made out against the accused respondents. It is

argued that from the statement of witnesses and material on

record, it is evident that the accused persons had beaten the uncle

of petitioner. It is argued that the investigating officer has not

investigated the matter in correct perspective and therefore, it is

prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the trial court

for passing a fresh order in accordance with law. Learned counsel

for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex

Court in the case of Shivjee Singh Vs. Nagendra Tiwary & ors

reported in AIR 2010 SC 2261 and it is argued that examination of

all the witnesses cited in the complaint is not mandatory prior to

taking cognizance and issue of process against the accused

persons.

[2023/RJJD/014546] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-3358/2018]

Learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned orders

and submitted that both the courts below have discussed each and

every aspect of the matter and have rightly rejected the protest

petition and revision petition respectively, which does not called

for any interference.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the

orders impugned so also the record.

It is not disputed that after thorough investigation, the police

submitted a final report to the effect that no case is made out

against the respondents as the petitioner failed to make out a

prima facie case against the respondents. Learned Judicial

Magistrate after considering the Final report submitted by the

police, rejected the protest petition. The revision petition filed by

the petitioner also came to be dismissed by the Additional

Sessions Judge, Jaitaran by way of a detailed order. In the opinion

of this Court, no plausible ground exists for disbelieving the

negative Final report filed by the police after thorough

investigation. Learned court below after considering the entire

material on record, has accepted the Final report filed by the

police. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned orders

dated 30.08.2010 & 19.06.2018. Hence, this misc. petition is

hereby dismissed.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J 170-BJSH/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)