Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhanwar Lal vs State And Anr. (2025:Rj-Jd:13513) on 11 March, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:13513]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 40/2013
Bhanwar Lal S/o Shri Chandra Ram, by caste Jat, R/o Devipura,
Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu ----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan
2. Poonam devi W/o Late Dana Ram Sahid, by caste Jat, R/o
Devipura, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu. ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Fageria for
Mr. Vikas Bijarnia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA cum AAG
with Mr. Kuldeep Singh Kumpawat
Mr. Devendra Mahalana
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
11/03/2025
The present criminal revision petition under Section 397 R/w
Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against the
order dated 04.10.2008 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Rajgarh, District Churu, whereby the Final report
submitted by the police was accepted. Upon revision petition filed
by the respondent No.2, The revisional court i.e. learned
Additional District & Session Judge, Rajgarh, District Churu in
Criminal Revision No.34/2009 vide order dated 01.12.2012,
allowed the revision petition filed by respondent No.2 while setting
aside the order dated 04.10.2008, remanded the matter back to
the trial court for passing a fresh order in accordance with law
after hearing both the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially, the
Police submitted a Final Report, and the same was accepted by
the trial court. However, the revisional court without assigning any
cogent reason and acting in a mechanical manner, set aside the
[2025:RJ-JD:13513] (2 of 2) [CRLR-40/2013]
order of trial court and remanded the case back for passing a
fresh order in accordance with law after hearing both the parties.
Therefore, it is prayed that the order passed by revisional court
being per se illegal deserves to be quashed and set aside.
Learned AAG and counsel for the respondent No.2 opposed
the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and
submitted that the revisional court has rightly remanded the case
back and a fresh order is yet to be passed, therefore, no
interference is called for in the present matter.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
impugned orders passed by the courts below as well as carefully
gone through the material available on record.
Upon perusal of the impugned orders, it is evident that the
revisional court remanded the case back with a direction to pass a
fresh order in accordance with law after hearing both the parties
and the trial court is yet to pass a fresh order in accordance with
law. In the opinion of this Court, no interferenc is called for in the
impugned order dated 01.12.2012 passed by the learned
Additional District & Session Judge, Rajgarh, District Churu.
Hence, the present criminal revision petition stands
dismissed.
Stay application also stands decided.
Record, if received, be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
148-mSingh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
