Partly allowed

Raju S/O Shri Chhitar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC15 May 2019CRLMP/1003/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court partly allowed the petitioner's CRMP to quash non-bailable arrest warrants. Considering the negative final report and acquittal of co-accused, the Court directed the lower court to summon the petitioner via bailable warrants instead.

What did the court decide?

The order directing summons by arrest warrants was quashed; the petitioner was directed to be summoned by bailable warrants.

Raju S/O Shri Chhitar Vs State of Rajasthan… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1003/2019

¶3

Raju S/o Shri Chhitar, R/o Vill. Dalalpura Ps Baswa Teh. Baswa Dist. Dausa

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Raj.

¶7

Sushila D/o Devi Sahai, R/o Kali Pahadi Ps Rajgar Dist. Alwar

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohar Pal Meena Mr. Lakhan Singh Meena For State : Mr. Arvind Kumar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶11

Judgment / Order

¶12

15/05/2019

¶13

Petitioner has preferred this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition seeking quashing of order dated 19.06.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rajgarh, District Alwar.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that initially Police submitted negative final report against the petitioner. As far as petitioner is concerned, co-accused have been acquitted by the trial Court vide order dated 19.06.2014 and while passing the order of acquittal against the accused of that case, Court has allowed the application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. and has summoned the petitioner by arrest warrants.

¶15

After hearing at some length, limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner is that instead of arrest warrants, petitioner should be summoned by bailable warrants.

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLMP-1003/2019]

¶18

I have considered the contentions.

¶19

In view of the fact that negative final report was submitted. As far as petitioner is concerned and he has now been summoned by non-bailable warrants, the present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition deserves to be and is accordingly partly allowed.

¶20

The present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is partly allowed.

¶21

The order to the extent petitioner has been directed to be summoned by arrest warrants is quashed.

¶22

Court below is directed to summon the petitioner by bailable warrants.

¶23

Stay application stands disposed.

¶24

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶25

AMIT KUMAR /76

Raju S/O Shri Chhitar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju S/O Shri Chhitar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

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

Prabhu Narayan Meena Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Babu Lal Sharma Son of Late Shri Kanhaiya Lal, B/C Brahmin Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Singh Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Ratni Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Sibba and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Geeta Enterprises Vs Babu Lal Meena S/O Shri Kanaram Meena