Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kishan Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:9131) on 22 February, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2024:RJ-JD:9131]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1005/2023
Kishan Lal S/o Limba Ji Gameti, Aged About 21 Years, R/o
Nimach Kheda, Nahar Wali Road, Devali, Distt. Udaipur.
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Ashok Kumar, R/o Nimach Kheda, Nahar Wali
Road ,ambamata, Udaipur.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Digvijay Singh Chouhan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
Mr. Abdul Kadir
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
22/02/2024
Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 21.04.2023 passed by learned Special
Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) Cases, Udaipur
whereby the learned Judge dismissed the protest petition and
accepted the FR filed by the police in FIR No. 121/2020.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant complainant
submitted a written complaint before the court below to the effect
that the respondent no.2 forcibly took possession of his land and
cut down the Neem tree. When the appellant objected, the
respondent no.2 abused him using caste oriented language and
also threatened him. The complaint was sent to to the concerned
police station under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and FIR No. 121/2020
was registered for the offence under Sections 447, 427 IPC and
[2024:RJ-JD:9131] (2 of 3) [CRLAS-1005/2023]
Section 3(2)(iv) & (v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and
after investigation, the police submitted FR that no case is made
out against the accused respondent. The appellant filed a protest
petition before the learned trial court. After considering the
evidence collected during investigation and recording statement of
witnesses, the court of learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention
of Atrocities) Cases, Udaipur accepted the Final Report and
rejected the protest petition vide order dated 21.04.2023.
Counsel for the appellant submits that without considering
the material aspect of the matter, the trial court mechanically
rejected the protest petition filed by the appellant. It is argued
that on the basis of statement of the complainant and witnesses
recorded, a prima facie case is clearly made out against the
accused respondent. It is argued that the learned trial court failed
to apply its mind whereas, a prima facie case was made out
against the accused respondent. 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 Public Prosecutor supported the impugned order and
submitted that the trial court has discussed each and every aspect
of the matter and have rightly rejected the protest petition, which
does not call 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 appellant failed to make out a
[2024:RJ-JD:9131] (3 of 3) [CRLAS-1005/2023]
prima facie case against the respondent. Learned trial court after
considering the Final report submitted by the police, rejected the
protest petition on the said ground 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
order dated 21.04.2023. Hence, this criminal appeal is hereby
dismissed.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
89-BJSH/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
