State vs Bajrang Das And Anr. ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 8526 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

State vs Bajrang Das And Anr. ... on 25 September, 2024

Author: Birendra Kumar

Bench: Birendra Kumar

[2024:RJ-JD:39879]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
             S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 710/2006

State of Rajasthan
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1. Bajrang Das S/o Meghraj R/o Vikas W.S.P. Ltd, Udhyog Vihar,
Sri Ganganagar.
2. Banshidhar Jindal S/o Gordhandas, R/o 90-93 Sri Ganganagar.


                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP
For Respondent(s)         :     ----



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Order

25/09/2024

The state of Rajasthan has challenged the judgment dated

16.05.2006 passed in Sessions Case No.23/2006, whereby, the

learned trial judge discharged respondent Nos.1 and 2.

Prosecution case is that on 24.07.2002, two persons came

and inflicted firearm injury and gave knife blow to Balmukand, as

a result whereof, Balmukand died.

Allegation is that the respondents were suspected to have

conspired the murder. Learned trial judge perused the material

collected during investigation and came to the conclusion that no

witness stated before the police that the respondents were

anyway involved in the commission of murder.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that at the

stage of charge, meticulous appreciation is not permissible. It

[2024:RJ-JD:39879] (2 of 2) [CRLR-710/2006]

would be subject matter of trial to see whether the case of

conspiracy is proved against respondent Nos.1 and 2 or not.

Even at the stage of charge, the court is required to look into

the prosecution evidence and the materials produced as it is. If on

a bare perusal of the material collected during investigation, no

case is made out, there is no reason to proceed with the trial

against those accused (respondents herein).

Hence, this court does not find any reason to interfere with

the impugned order.

Accordingly, this criminal revision stands dismissed.

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J 58-nitin/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)