The High Court of Rajasthan allowed this criminal revision challenging an appellate order under CrPC. The court held that the appellate court was correct in directing further evidence collection and proceedings regarding lathiyal and mankatha.
The petition was dismissed in favor of the respondent, affirming the order of the Appellate Court.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 1045 / 2017
----Petitioners
Versus
The State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
;kphx.k dh vksj ls ofj”B vf/koDrk Jh txekyflag pkS/kjh e; Jh r:.k <+kdk] yksd vfHk;kstd Jh jkts’k HkkVh] mifLFkrA
ekuuh; U;k;kf/kifr Jh lanhi egrks vkn’k@fus .kZ;
21@08@2017
lquk x;kA ;kphx.k dh vksj ls ;g fuxjkuh ;kfpdk fo}ku vij l= U;k;k/kh’k] ckyksrjk }kjk l= izdj.k la[;k 78@2013 esa ikfjr vkns’k fnukad 05-06-2017 ls O;fFkr gks izLrqr dh xbZ gS ftl vkns’k ls fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us ;kphx.k ds fo:) vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 458] 341] 323] 325 o 436 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds rgr vkjksi fojfpr djus dk funsZ’k fn;kA
fo}ku ofj”B vf/koDrk Jh pkS/kjh dk rdZ jgk fd ekeyk flfoy uspj dk gS ,oa i{kdkjku ds e/; flfoy ekeys yafcr gSA vr% v;kphx.k vkjksiksa ls mUeksfpr fd, tkus ;ksX; gSA
fo}ku ofj”B vf/koDrk Jh pkS/kjh ,oa fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd ds rdksaZ dks lquus ds i’pkr rFkk vk{ksfir vkns’k ds voyksdu ds ckn Jh pkS/kjh ds mDr rdZ Lohdkj ;ksX;
(2 of 2)
[CRLR-1045/2017]
ugha gS D;ksafd ;g lk{; dk fo”k; gSA bl U;k;ky; dh ;g jk; gS fd fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us lk{; dk mfpr foospu djrs gq, v;kphx.k ds fo:) vkjksi fojfpr djus dk vkns’k fn;k gSA vk{ksfir vkns’k esa fdlh izdkj dh dkuwuh vFkok rF;kRed Hkwy ekStwn ugha gSA
rnuqlkj] ;g fuxjkuh ;kfpdk lkjghu gksus ds vk/kkj ij fujLr dh tkrh gSA
¼lanhi esgrk½ U;k;kf/kifr
,l-,u-yksgjk@79
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Appellate Court had the authority to order further criminal proceedings under sections 458, 341, 323, 325 and 436 of the CrPC.
Whether the Appellate Court committed any legal or factual error in passing the impugned order.
5 provisions across 1 enactments
Laxman Singh S/o Padma Ram
Prahlad Ram S/o Moti Ram
The State of Rajasthan
J. B. Mishra
J. Roshan Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
