Dismissed

Ramniwas and Anr. v. State and Anr.

Rajasthan HC3 Oct 2017CRLA/1449/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed two appeals: one by accused challenging probation granted under Sections 323/325 IPC and another by complainant challenging acquittal under the SC/ST Act. The Court held objection to interfering with probation and clarified that the proper remedy for challenging acquittal under SC/ST Act is an appropriate appeal under Section 14A.

What did the court decide?

Both appeals were dismissed; complainant directed to file appropriate appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act.

Ramniwas and Anr. Vs State and Anr. — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1449 / 2017

¶3

Ramniwas S/o Sh. Nauranglal Pareek, Aged About 40 Years

¶4

Ratanlal @ Bholu S/o Sh. Nauranglal Pareek, Aged About 43 Years, Both by Caste Brahmin Resident of Ward No. 31, Ratangarh District Churu (Raj.)

¶5

----Appellants

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan Through Its P.P.

¶8

Nemichand S/o Sh. Vishnu Prasad, By Caste Meghwal Resident of Ward No. 31, Ratangarh District Churu (Raj.).

¶9

----Respondents Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1450 / 2017

¶11

Nemi Chand S/o Shri Vishnu Prasad, By Caste Meghwal, Resident of Ward No. 31, Ratangarh District Churu.

¶12

----Appellant Versus

¶13

The State of Rajasthan

¶14

Ramniwas S/o Nourang Lal Pareek, Aged About 40 Years, By Caste Brahmin, Resident of Ward No. 31, Ratangarh District Churu.

¶15

Ratan Lal @ Bholu S/o Nourang Lal Pareek, Aged About 43 Years, By Caste Brahmin, Resident of Ward No. 31, Ratangarh District Churu.

¶16

_____________________________________________________ For Appellants Mr.Ramniwas & Mr.Ratanlal : Mr.Kaushal Gautam. For Respondent Mr.Nemi Chand : Mr.Om Rajpurohit. For Respondent State : Mr.OP Rathi, PP.

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

Judgment / Order

(2 of 3)

03/10/2017

These two appeals are directed against the judgment dated

¶22

25.5.2017 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act Cases, Churu in Sessions Case No.48/2009. By the impugned judgment, learned Special Judge acquitted the accused Ramniwas and Ratanlal (appellants in appeal no.1449/2017) from the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act, held them guilty for the offences under Sections 323 and 325 IPC and extended the benefit of probation to them while imposing prosecution cost of Rs.5,000/each upon the accused.

¶23

Accused Ramniwas and Ratanlal have challenged the impugned judgment whereby, they were convicted and extended the benefit of probation whereas the complainant Nemi Chand has preferred appeal no.1450/2017 being aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused from charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act.

¶24

Ex-facie I am of the opinion that the appeal preferred by the complainant so far as challenge laid to the benefit of probation granted to the accused by the trial Court is concerned, the same is perse devoid of merit because the offences for which the respondents were convicted carry a maximum sentence of 7 years and as such, no irregularity or illegality was committed by the trial Court in extending the benefit of probation to the accused after convicting them for these offences. If at all the complainant is aggrieved by acquittal of the accused from the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act, then he has to prefer an appropriate appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act.

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

So far as the appeal preferred by the accused appellants is concerned, the same is also not tenable as I find that the findings recorded by the trial Court in the impugned judgment are based on just and proper appreciation of the material available on record and do not warrant any interference by this Court.

¶27

Consequently, both these appeals fail and are hereby

¶28

dismissed.

¶29

A copy of this order be placed in both the files.

¶30

(SANDEEP MEHTA)J.

¶31

S.Phophaliya/-

Ramniwas and Anr. v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramniwas and Anr. v. State 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

Hariom and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthn and Ors.

Hetram Vs Bhanwarlal and Anr.

Wasim Khan Vs State

Natha Ram and Ors. Vs State and Anr.

Deena Ram Vs State and Anr.

Babu Lal @ Babu Ram Vs U.O.I.