Dismissed

Vinita Dave v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Nov 2022CRLMP/2714/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the criminal miscellany petition filed under Section 482 CrPC challenging proceedings in a trial case. The Bench declined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction due to the petitioner's failure to appear, noting she had previously withdrawn a similar petition after a coordinate bench directed expedited proceedings.

What did the court decide?

petition dismissed; stay petition dismissed.

Vinita Dave Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2714/2022

¶3

Vinita Dave W/o Amit Kumar Dave, Aged About 34 Years, B/c Brahmin, R/o Kethnodh, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Barmer (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Government Advocate, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur.

¶7

Harchandlal Solanki S/o Motilal Solanki, B/c Jingar, R/o Khanpura Bas, Jalore, District Jalore (Raj.), Presently Residing At Godie Ji, Shire Mandir Road, Jalore (Raj.)

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Nonepresent
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.K. Bhati, Public Prosecutor
	Mr. Piyush Chouhan for complainant

¶10

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶11

Order

¶12

01/11/2022

¶13

Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner.

¶14

By way of the present petition filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has challenged the proceedings in criminal case No.232/2016, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Jalore.

¶15

Mr. Piyush Chouhan, learned counsel for the complainant at the outset pointed out that the petitioner had earlier filed a criminal misc. petition (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.5739/2019), of course challenging an interlocutory order but when a coordinate Bench of this Court was not inclined to interfere the matter, the petitioner withdrew the said misc. petition. It is also pointed out that the coordinate Bench of this Court had not

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLMP-2714/2022]

¶18

only dismissed the aforesaid petition filed by the petitioner, but had also issued direction to the trial Court to expedite the proceedings and conclude the same within a period of three months thereafter.

¶19

Learned counsel for the complainant further pointed out that after disposal of the above referred criminal misc. petition, the petitioner has willfully not appeared before the trial Court and resultantly, arrest warrants have been issued against her for securing her presence.

¶20

Having regard to the submissions noted hereinabove and considering that the reason and grounds for which the present petition has been filed were also available to the petitioner when earlier petition (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.5739/2019) was filed and also because, even today, nobody has appeared to argue the matter, this Court is not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction under section 482 of the Code.

¶21

The misc. petition therefore fails.

¶22

Stay petition also stands dismissed accordingly.

¶23

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶24

153-Ramesh/-

Vinita Dave v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinita Dave 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahir Seth Vs State of Rajasthan

Ratan Kumar Viswas Vs State of Rajasthan

Jeet Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Gurpreet Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwanlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinita Dave Vs State of Rajasthan