In this S.B.C. revision petition challenging the framing of a murder charge, the High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the appeal against a trial court order that had framed charges against the petitioner under Sections 302, 201, and 34 IPC.
No relief granted; revision petition dismissed.
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.
(1 of 2)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 61/2017
Smt. Uganta W/o Kishan Lal B/c Gurjar, R/o Kochar Doongar, Patti Amavara, Tehsil Bamanwas, Distt. Sawai Madhopur
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner : Mr. D.K. Dixit
For Respondent : Mr. Ram Ratan Gurjar, P.P.
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Order
04/12/2017
Petitioner has filed this revision petition under Section 397 read with 401 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the order dated 4.11.2016, whereby, charges were ordered to be framed against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that infact, it is a case of no evidence. As per the post mortem examination report, deceased had died on account of hanging. From the statement of Kavita (daughter of the petitioner and the deceased) it cannot be inferred that the petitioner was responsible for committing the alleged offence. Hence, petitioner was liable to be discharged.
Learned state counsel, has opposed the petition.
Present case relates to murder of Ram Bhajan, husband of the petitioner. Dead body of the deceased was found
(2 of 2 )
hanging from a tree. During investigation, statement of the daughter of the petitioner was recorded.
As per the daughter of the petitioner, co-accused pappu use to visit their house. She has also stated that her mother and father used to quarrel with each other. In the evening, that is, a day prior to the recovery of the dead body, coaccused pappu along with the brother of the petitioner had visited their house and they had taken liquor with her father. Thereafter, her uncle as well as co-accused pappu had left and she had gone to sleep along with her mother after attending some pre-wedding celebration. Dead body of her father was found hanging from a tree on the next day.
During investigation, it transpired that the petitioner and her co-accused pappu were having illicit relations and had murdered Ram Bhajan. Their call details were also taken in possession.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, learned trial court had rightly ordered the framing of charges against the petitioner under Section 302, 201/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Hence, no ground for interference by this court is made
out.
Dismissed.
(SABINA)J.
Mohita/18
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is a ground for interference under Section 397 CrPC given the petitioner’s claim of no evidence.
Whether the trial court correctly framed charges under Section 302, 201 and 34 IPC against the petitioner for the murder of her husband.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Uganta W/o Kishan Lal
State of Rajasthan
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
