Dismissed

Ramanand S/O Ramchandra B/C Prajapat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Dec 2019CRLMP/3367/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by a complainant challenging the dismissal of an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. and a subsequent revision petition. The court held that evidence showed only Sultan Singh committed cheating, not the co-accused respondents, and thus no case was made out against them.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous petition challenging the orders dated 16.11.2018 and 30.03.2019 was dismissed.

Ramanand S/O Ramchandra B/C Prajapat Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3367/2019

¶3

Ramanand S/o Ramchandra B/c Prajapat, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Kaluka, Tehsil And Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar, Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.

¶7

Kartar Singh, B/c Jat, R/o Hathundi, Tehsil And Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar, Raj.

¶8

Manphool S/o Khyaliram, B/c Jat, R/o Hathundi, Tehsil And Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar, Raj.

¶9

Lalaram S/o Khyaliram, B/c Jat, R/o Hathundi, Tehsil And Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar, Raj.

¶10

Kuldeep @ Kudiya S/o Khyaliram, B/c Jat, R/o Hathundi, Tehsil And Police Station Mundawar, District Alwar, Raj.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. V.D. Agnihotri with Mr. D.C. Sharma.
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Ramesh Choudhary,P.P.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

¶14

Order

¶15

13/12/2019

¶16

This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitionercomplainant challenging the order dated 16.11.2018 whereby the application filed by the petitioner-complainant under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. was dismissed by the trial court as well as the order dated 30.03.2019 whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 16.11.2018 was also dismissed by the revisional court.

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CRLMP-3367/2019]

¶19

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner-complainant has lodged the FIR No.39/2007 in which the investigating agency after conclusion of the investigation submitted the charge-sheet against two persons namely Sultan Singh & Kartar Singh for the offences under Section 420 & 120B of IPC. During pendency of the proceedings before the trial court the petitioner has filed an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. for taking cognizance against the respondents no.3 to 5. The said application was dismissed by the trial court vide order dated 16.11.2018. Being aggrieved by the order dated 16.11.2018 the petitioner has filed revision petition which was also dismissed by the revisional court vide order dated 30.03.2019. Hence, this criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner-complainant challenging the orders dated 16.11.2018 & 30.03.2019.

¶20

Counsel for the petitioner-complainant submits that the petitioner has purchased the land in dispute from Sultan Singh by agreement to sell dated 28.05.2005. Counsel further submits that Sultan Singh has sold the same land in dispute to the respondents no.2 to 5. Counsel further submits that the trial court has committed illegality in not taking cognizance against the respondents no.3 to 5. Counsel further submits that the revisional court has also committed illegality in dismissing the revision petition filed by the petitioner-complainant.

¶21

Learned Pubic Prosecutor has opposed the criminal misc. petition.

¶22

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶23

This criminal misc. petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed for the reasons; firstly, the trial court has considered the evidence available on record and found that only Sultan Singh

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[CRLMP-3367/2019]

¶26

has committed cheating with the accused-petitioner by selling the land in dispute to other co-accused Kartar Singh, therefore, the police has rightly filed the charge-sheet against these two persons for the offences under Sections 420 & 120B of IPC; secondly, the revisional court has considered the documents available on record sale deed Ex.-12, whereby the land in dispute was subsequently sold to accused Kartar Singh and also considered the other sale deed Ex.4 according to which the land sold by Sultan Singh is not related to the disputed land and therefore, in my considered view no case is made out in favour of the petitioner.

¶27

In that view of the matter, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed.

¶28

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

¶29

MG/49

Ramanand S/O Ramchandra B/C Prajapat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramanand S/O Ramchandra B/C Prajapat v. State of Rajasthan

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

Pooja Sharma D/O Shri Banwari Lal Sharma B/C Jangid Vs State of Rajasthan

Sujit Kumar S/O Shri Jaldir Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Yellow Tie Hospitality Management Ltd. Vs State of Rajasthan

Kapil Palsaniya Son of Shri Jugal Kishore Vs State of Rajasthan

Kedar S/O Rewar Mal Vs State of Rajasthan

Monika D/O Shri Surendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan