Dismissed

Lalita Yadav D/O Sh. Basant Kumar Yadav v. Navratan Kumawat S/O Sh. Babu Lal Kumawat

Rajasthan HC18 Jan 2019CRLR/1692/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision petition, the High Court examined an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by a private party seeking examination of witnesses not recorded by police or mentioned by the victim. The Court dismissed the petition, holding that witnesses omitted by the prosecutrix are not relevant.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Revision Petition praying for examination of witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was dismissed. Stay application stands disposed.

Lalita Yadav D/O Sh. Basant Kumar Yadav Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 1692/2018

¶3

Lalita Yadav D/o Sh. Basant Kumar Yadav, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Chirag Enclave, 246 G-1, Padmawati-B, Nirman Nagar, King Road, Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Navratan Kumawat S/o Sh. Babu Lal Kumawat, Aged About 43 Years, R/o 114/b-5, Rail Nagar, Nirman Nagar, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur.

¶7

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Rajasthan.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Anupama Sharma for Mr. Prem Krishan Sharma For State : Mr. R.R. Singh Rathore, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶11

Judgment

¶12

18/01/2019

¶13

Petitioner has preferred this Criminal Revision Petition aggrieved by order dated 01.08.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Mahila Utpidan Case No.2) Jaipur Metropolitan, City Jaipur, vide which the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was rejected.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that there were two material witnesses whose statement were not recorded by the Police and were relevant for deciding the controversy in dispute. It is contended that in absence of examination of these two witnesses serious prejudice would be caused to the complainantpetitioner.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLR-1692/2018]

¶17

Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on “ Amanullah & Anr. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. ” (2016) 6 SCC

¶18

699 and has contended that private party has a right to move an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. Trial Court was not justified in rejecting the application, as it was not filed by the Public Prosecutor.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the present Criminal Revision Petition.

¶20

I have considered the contentions and have perused the order dated 01.08.2018.

¶21

Court below has specifically mentioned in the impugned order that in the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and in her examination in chief she has not mentioned the name of these witnesses. It is also mentioned that Police has not examined these witnesses and the witnesses are not in the list of witnesses annexed with the chargesheet.

¶22

In view of the fact that the Court below has come to the conclusion that witnesses are not relevant as they do not find place in the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. and in the Court’s statement, I do not find any force in the present Criminal Revision Petition.

¶23

The present Criminal Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶24

Stay application sands disposed.

¶25

(PANKAJ BHANDARI), J.

¶26

Amit/64

Lalita Yadav D/O Sh. Basant Kumar Yadav v. Navratan Kumawat S/O Sh. Babu Lal Kumawat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalita Yadav D/O Sh. Basant Kumar Yadav v. Navratan Kumawat S/O Sh. Babu Lal Kumawat

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

Kanhiyalal Vs State

Bhawani Singh Kachhawa Vs M/S Avtar Finance and Anr.

Badri Narayan Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Jaspal @ Dimpal S/O Shri Sardar Makkhan Singh B/C Sikh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Hussain Khan S/O Peer Khan B/C Muslim Vs State of Rajasthan

Jairam S/O Shri Ganpat B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp