Dismissed

Guljhari Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajasthan HC14 Aug 2019CRLMP/4700/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the miscellaneous petition filed by a teacher challenging the taking of cognizance against him. Holding that starting an unapproved course is an offence, the Court ruled that second revision is barred and inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. were not applicable.

What did the court decide?

Miscellaneous petition dismissed; stay application disposed.

Guljhari Lal Sharma Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4700/2013

¶3

Guljhari Lal Sharma son of Late Satyanarayan Sharma, aged 50 years, by caste Brahmin, R/o House No. B-2 C, Shiv Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan through P.P.

¶7

Akbar Ali son of Shri Yusuf Ali, aged 42 years, by caste Vyapari Musalman, R/o Infront of B.D.K. Hospital, Station Road, Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan).

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Vipul Jaiman for Mr. S.S. Sunda
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Arun Singh Shekhawat
For State	:	Mr. Arvind Bhadu, P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶11

Order

¶12

14/08/2019

¶13

Petitioner has preferred this misc. petition aggrieved by order dated 25.10.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Jhunjhunu whereby, Revision Petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed and order dated 11.12.2012 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu whereby, he took cognizance against the petitioner, was affirmed.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that complainant-respondent did Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Application (for short ‘PGDCA’) in the year 1995. Thereafter, he was appointed in an Institute. He filed a criminal complaint in the year 2011 alleging that the institute was not authorized to run

¶15

(2 of 4)

¶16

[CRLMP-4700/2013]

¶17

PGDCA Course. It is contended that there is an inordinate delay in lodging of complaint.

¶18

It is also contended that Police after due investigation has submitted negative final report. Court while taking cognizance has not discussed the negative final report. It is further contended that in the certificate issued to the complainant, it was specifically mentioned that the institute is affiliated to University of Rajasthan, Jaipur for D.C.A. and it was not mentioned that the institute is affiliated for PGDCA Course.

¶19

Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Kanhaiyalal vs. State of Rajasthan , 2012 (1) RCC (Raj.) 26, Bhagwan Sahai Khandelwal & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan , 2006 (2) R.C.C. 853 and Inderjeet Singh vs. State of Rajasthan , S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.1855/2016 decided by this Court on 03.04.2017.

¶20

Counsel for the complainant has opposed the misc. petition. It is contended that in the application form for PGDCA, it was mentioned that the course is approved by University of Rajasthan. It is also contended that petitioner was not aware of the fact that his certificate is not recognized by the University and when he left the service of the Institute, he came to know that his course is not recognized by University of Rajasthan.

¶21

It is also contended that petitioner has already availed the remedy of revision and second revision is barred under SubSection (3) of Section 397 of Cr.P.C. It is further contended that complainant has obtained information under Right to Information Act from the University and University has replied that without affiliation with the University, no college can commence new course.

¶22

(3 of 4)

¶23

[CRLMP-4700/2013]

¶24

I have considered the contentions.

¶25

There is specific allegation in the complaint that in the booklet issued by the Institute for the year 2010-2011 for PGDCA Course, it is mentioned that it is a one year course, which is affiliated with Rajasthan University and admission to this course is given on the basis of graduate qualification.

¶26

The contention of counsel for the petitioner that in the certificate issued, it was mentioned that affiliation with the University of Rajasthan is for the course of D.C.A. There was no mention that PGDCA Course is also affiliated, cannot be considered to be good defence for the very reason that no new course can be started by an Institute without approval of the University. It is not defence of the petitioner that they had requisite affiliation with the University or that they had taken prior approval of the University to run the course, offence was thus made out against the petitioner.

¶27

I have perused the negative final report, Investigating Officer has not assigned any material reason for submitting negative final report. It is only mentioned that in the certificate it is not mentioned that it is recognized by Rajasthan University and the other reason for submitting negative final report was that the Institute is not having any student and has closed.

¶28

Court below has not committed any error in taking cognizance against the petitioner. Petitioner has already availed the remedy of revision. Sub-Section (3) of Section 397 of Cr.P.C. bars filing of second revision and recourse to Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be taken only in exceptional cases. The present case is not an exceptional case so as to invoke the inherent powers.

¶29

(4 of 4)

¶30

[CRLMP-4700/2013]

¶31

The misc. petition is accordingly dismissed. Stay application stands disposed.

¶32

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶33

Simple Kumawat/03

Guljhari Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guljhari Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surajmal Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Gyan Singh and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Sultan Singh Meena and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through P.P. and Anr.

Prem Chand Raghuvanshi Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Hari Kishan and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Dataram Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.