The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed a Special Leave Petition challenging an order by a Special Judge framing charges under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and IPC against petitioners for assault and injury, holding the impugned order meritorious and rejecting the arguments of counsel.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.802/2009 S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Application No.785/2009 (Sant Kumar & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan & Anr.)
Date of Order :: 9th January, 2014
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Mr. D.S. Poonia, counsel for the petitioners
Mr. Sunil Kr. Singodiya, counsel for the respondent No.2 Mr. Peeyush Kumar, PP for the State
This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 26.2.2009 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases and Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu in Sessions Case No. 139/2008, whereby charges have been framed against the accused petitioners for the offence under Sections 452, 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order dated 26.2.2009 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases in Sessions Case No. 139/2008.
I am in unison with the findings arrived at by the court below in his order dated 26.2.2009. The relevant part of the order dated 26.2.2009 reads as under:
"अ�भयु�गण �ारा भगवानाराम ए�म उसक� प�ी कैलाश देवी को मारपीट करने का कथन �कया है, उनके चोट ��तवेदन भी प�ावल� मे सलं�न है| अत: इस �टेज पर उ�हे अस�य माने जाने का कोई कारण नह� है| अत: धारा 323 भारतीय दंड सि�हता का अपराध भी अ�भयु�गण के �व�ध �थम��या
�मा�णत है|
जहाँ तक धारा 452 भारतीय दंड सि�हता के अपराध का �� है, �व�ान वक�ल अ�भयु� प� क� ओर से अपनी �ल�खत बहस मे तक� �कया गया है �क मु��गीस ने ���म ने न�शा मौका आम चौक मे वारदात होना बताया है और न�शा मौका दो गवाहान से त�द�क नह� है, इस�लये धारा 452 भारतीय दंड सि�हता का अपराध बनना नह� पाया जाता| मै उनके इस तक� से भी सहमत नह� हूँ|
प�ावल� पर उपल�ध न�शा मौका मे मारपीट का �थल "X” है जो �क प�रवा�द के म�नगेट के अ�दर है, वह आम चौक नह� है तथा भगवानराम, भवानीशंकर एव्. �भात के ह�ता�र उ� न�शा मौका पर है| बनवार�लाल गवाह के ह�ता�र न होने मा� से पूर� घटना को झूढा नह� माना जा सकता| अत: उनका यह तक� माने जाने यो�य नह� है| अत: अ�भयु�गण के �व�ध धारा 452 भारतीय �ंड सि�हता का अपराध भी �थम��या �मा�णत है"
In view of above, I do not think it proper to allow this revision petition and hence, the revision petition filed by the petitioners being bereft of any merit, deserves to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly.
Stay application also stands dismissed accordingly.
( Mahesh Chandra Sharma)J .
DK
All corrections made in the judgment / order have been incorporated in the judgment / order being E-mailed.
Dilip Khandelwal
PA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Special Judge’s order framing charges under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and IPC in a case of assault and alleged caste-based injury deserves allowance in revision.
Whether the revision petition against the order framing charges is meritorious in light of the facts found by the Special Judge.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sant Kumar & Ors.
State of Rajasthan
Mahesh Chandra Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
