Dismissed

Parbat Singh v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC5 Oct 2018CRLR/834/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In S.B. Criminal Revision No. 834/2017, the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur dismissed the petitioner's revision petition challenging the discharge of accused persons under Section 307/149 IPC. The court held that the injuries sustained were not dangerous to life and not on vital parts, thus finding no illegality in the lower court's order.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition was dismissed.

Parbat Singh Vs State and Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 834/2017

¶4

Parbat Singh S/o Jalam Singh, B/c Rajput, Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Balana, P.s. Takhatgarh, Dist. Pali. Injured

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan

¶8

Bhagwat Singh S/o Sultan Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶9

Jitendra Singh S/o Bhik Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶10

Narpat Singh S/o Khim Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶11

Ishwar Singh S/o Dungar Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶12

Kesar Singh S/o Prem Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶13

Shambhu Singh S/o Bhanwar Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶14

Mangu Singh S/o Bagh Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶15

Sur Singh S/o Vijay Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶16

Madan Singh S/o Prem Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶17

Vijay Singh S/o Poonat Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶18

Hari Singh S/o Ganesh Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶19

Prem Singh S/o Nahar Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶20

Bhik Singh S/o Poonam Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶21

Bhanwar Singh S/o Jawant Singh, B/c Rajput,

¶22

Lakhveer Singh S/o Doongar Singh, B/c Rajput, All Resident Of Village Balana, P.s. Takhatgarh, Dist. Pali. Accused

¶23

----Respondents

¶24

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. H.S. Balot For Respondent(s) : Mr. L.R. Upadhyay, P.P. Mr. Naresh Singh for Rakesh Arora, for the respective respondents

¶25

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Order

05/10/2018

(2 of 3)

[CRLR-834/2017]

As per the office report, notice of respondent No.6 has not been served upon him personally, however, from the report of the process server, it is clear that the said notice has been served upon real brother of the respondent No.6, hence, service of notice upon the respondent No.6 is sufficient. Notices upon other respondents have already been served and Mr. Rakesh Arora Advocate filed power on behalf of some of the respondents.

¶31

This revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 16.03.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sumerpur, District Pali (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘court below’) in Sessions Case No.28/2016, whereby it has discharged the respondent Nos.2 to 16 from the offence punishable under Sections 307/149 I.P.C. and send the matter to the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sumerpur for trying the respondent Nos.2 to 16 for the offence which are triable by that court.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the court below has grossly erred in discharging the accused respondent Nos.2 to 16 for the offence punishable under Section 307/149 I.P.C., though ample evidence is available on record which suggests that it is a fit case wherein charges should have been framed against the respondent Nos.2 to 16 for the offence punishable under Section 307/149 I.P.C.

¶33

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as Mr. Naresh Singh, counsel for the some of the respondents have supported the impugned order passed by the court below.

¶34

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the impugned order, I am of the opinion that the court below has not committed any illegality in passing the impugned

¶35

(3 of 3)

¶36

[CRLR-834/2017]

¶37

order because none of the injured person has received injury which can be termed as dangerous to life and those injuries are also not found on the vital part of the body of the injured person, hence, no interference is called for in this criminal revision petition.

¶38

The criminal revision petition is dismissed accordingly.

¶39

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶40

Taruna

Parbat Singh v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parbat Singh v. State and Ors.

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

Lichu Ram @ Laxman Vs State

Lakharam and Anr. Vs State and Anr.

Vishnu Ram Vs State and Ors.

Vajja Ram Vs State

Shyam Lal Vs State

Ganpat Vs State