Dismissed

Smt Asiya v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC8 Nov 2017CRLR/293/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, wife of an acquitted accused, challenged the dismissal of a prosecution application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to implead another accused who was alleged to have raped the prosecutrix. The High Court found no ground for interference as the trial court correctly dismissed the application due to the investigation finding the accused innocent and inconsistency in statements.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt Asiya Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. CR. REVISION PETITION NO. 293/2017.

¶3

Smt. Asiya Wife of Shokin, by Caste Fakir (mohmedden), Aged About 24 Years, R/o Lohsar, Kaman, District Bharatpur (raj.)

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Rajasthan Through P.P. For Petitioner(s) : Shri Ravindra Tomar

¶6

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶7

Order

¶8

8/11/2017

¶9

Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order dated 16.11.2016, whereby application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) was dismissed.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the prosecutrix had specifically stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that Aslam had raped her alongwith his co-accused Jitendra @ Lulu and Sita @ Sitaram. However, challan was not presented against accused Aslam. Prosecutrix, while appearing in the witness box, has duly stated that she had been raped by Aslam.

¶11

Trial court, while dismissing the application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning Aslam as additional accused, has held

¶12

that the accused Aslam was not named by the prosecutrix in the FIR. Although, prosecutrix had stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that she had been raped by Aslam, Sito @ Sitaram and Jitendra @ Lulu but while appearing in the witness box she had stated that she had only been raped by Aslam and not by any other person. Challan was presented only against accused Jitendra after investigation. So far as Aslam is concerned, he was found innocent during investigation. Since prosecutrix had taken different stand in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and her statement recorded during trial, learned trial court rightly held that the application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.c. was liable to be dismissed.

¶13

No ground for interference by this court is made

out.

Dismissed.

(SABINA)J.

Mrg./54

Smt Asiya v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt Asiya v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Executive Engineer, G M C and or Vs Lakhu and Anr.

G.M.Prscentral Bank of India Vs P.O.Cgit, Jaipur and Ors.

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Kailash Chand and Ors.

Rasik Bhai Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Sandeep Sharma and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Sukhvinder @ Sukhveer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp