Dismissed

Lal Singh and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2013CRLMP/3923/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge dismissed a s. 482 Cr.P.C. petition challenging an order of cognizance in a criminal case. The court held that since a revision against the cognizance order was already dismissed, no exceptional circumstances existed to entertain the petition as a second revision. Petitioners' absence on duty was not a valid ground for setting aside the order.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed and stay application dismissed. Petitioners free to raise issues at the trial.

Lal Singh and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.3923/2012

¶4

Lal Singh & Anr. Versus State & Anr.

¶5

DATE OF ORDER : 09/01/2013 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI

¶6

Mr. V.S. Fauzdar, for petitioners Mr. Laxman Meena, Public Prosecutor

¶7

¶8

By this petition, a challenge is made to the order taking cognizance for offence u/ss.323 & 341 IPC. A revision petition preferred against the said order has also been dismissed.

¶9

Learned Counsel submits that petitioners were not available on spot yet made accused. It is in ignorance of the Final Report given by the Police indicating that no case is made out against petitioners, hence, both the orders impugned herein may be set aside.

¶10

I have considered the submission and find that cognizance for the offence has been taken by the court below by a detailed order. The revision petition preferred against the said order was also decided by a well considered order. Petition u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed mainly on the ground that petitioners were not available at the place of incident rather there were on duty, being government servant. The revisional court considered aforesaid aspect and came to the

¶11

¶12

conclusion that fact aforesaid cannot be considered while an order for cognizance is passed. In view of the above and taking note that no exceptional circumstances exist to entertain this petition u/s.482 Cr.P.C. which literally remains as second revision petition and is barred under law.

¶13

Accordingly, I am not inclined to entertain this petition, hence, same is dismissed. Petitioners would be at liberty to raise all the issues at the time of hearing of the case for framing of charges and order herein will not cause any prejudice to them. Stay application is also dismissed.

¶14

FRBOHRA/3923CMP2012.doc

¶15

Certificate:

¶16

“All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.”

¶17

FATEH RAJ BOHRA, P.A.

Lal Singh and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lal Singh and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harimohan Vs State of Rajasthan through P P.

Mohd. Salim Vs Parveen Bansal and Anr.

Bhura Alias Ashok Vs State of Rajasthan through P.P.

Jagdish Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Wazid Khan Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Roshan Lal and Another Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp.