Dismissed

Mohini Devi Verma v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC5 Dec 2019CRLMP/448/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging the dismissal of an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recording the petitioner's statement, noting the absence of cogent reasons and excessive delay in the trial.

What did the court decide?

Criminal miscellaneous petition dismissed. Trial court directed to expedite trial. Pending applications disposed of.

Mohini Devi Verma Vs State of Rajasthan and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 448/2013

¶3

Mohini Devi Verma wife of Murlidhar Verma b/c Bunkar resident of Dhanota PS Shapura Distt. Jaipur (Rural) (Rajasthan)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan through P.P.

¶7

Lal Singh son of Chotha Singh b/c Rajput r/o Village Dhonata PS Amarsar Distt. Jaipur.

¶8

Jagdish Meena son of Bheru Meena b/c Meena R/o Village Dhonata PS Amarsar Distt. Jaipur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narottam Lal Debana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order

¶12

05/12/2019

¶13

This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 08.01.2013 passed by the trial Court whereby the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.

¶14

Brief facts of the case are that the one FIR was lodged by the complainant-Murlidhar against the accused-respondents under Section 143, 323, 504, 336 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act. During pendency of the trial, the evidence of the petitioner (PW-1) was recorded by the trial Court on 22.01.2011 and thereafter the matter was fixed for cross-examination by the trial Court. Counsel further submits that when the petitioner was called for crossexamination, she has filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. which was dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 08.01.2013. Hence, the present criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the trial Court dated 08.01.2013.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMP-448/2013]

¶17

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial Court has committed serious illegality in dismissing the application filed by the petitioner. Counsel further submits that no prejudice would be caused to the accused-respondent as the evidence of the prosecution has not been completed as yet.

¶18

Counsel for the respondent submitted that no reason whatsoever has been assigned in the application submitted by the petitioner for again recording of her statement before the trial Court. Counsel further submits that the FIR in this matter was lodged in 2003 and the case is pending before the trial Court since 2007 and the application has been filed by the petitioner just to delay the proceedings.

¶19

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. This criminal misc. petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed for the reasons; firstly, no cogent reason has been assigned by the petitioner in her application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for again recording of her statement before the trial Court; secondly, the matter is pending before the trial Court since 2007, therefore, it seems that the application has been filed just to delay the proceedings; thirdly, the trial Court has rightly used its discretion in dismissing the application filed by the petitioner.

¶20

In that view of the matter, this criminal misc. petition stands dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. All the pending applications stands disposed of.

¶21

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

¶22

JYOTI /46

Mohini Devi Verma v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohini Devi Verma v. State of Rajasthan 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

Amba Lal Salvi Vs State of Rajasthan

Pari Jindal D/O Shri Ashoka Rajan Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

Smt Savina Bano W/O Mohd. Arif Chajjad Vs State of Rajasthan

Nityanand Sharma S/O Shri Harsahay Sharma B/C Brahmin Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh S/O Ramdayal B/C Dhaked Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramraj Son of Bhairu Lal Vs Laxman Das Son of Jai Singh