Allowed

Rakesh Soni v. State

Rajasthan HC21 Jul 2022CRLMP/3579/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a special bail petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court quashed an order closing the trial court's examination-in-chief of witnesses before cross-examination. The court directed remand to allow the petitioner a single opportunity for cross-examination.

What did the court decide?

Quashed order dated 03.05.2019; directed trial court to grant petitioner opportunity to cross-examine witnesses.

Rakesh Soni Vs State — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 3579/2019

¶3

Rakesh Soni S/o Om Prakash Soni, Aged About 40 Years, resident of Near Radha Vallabh Mandir, Sunaro Ki Ghati, Ps Kotwali, Jodhpur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan.

¶7

Ritesh Chouhan S/o Shri Sunil, by caste Rawat, aged 35 years, resident of Rawto Ka Bas, Inside Sojat Gate, Jodhpur. 3. Deep Singh S/o Late Shri Hari Singh, by caste Rawat, aged 53 years, resident of Rawto Ka Bas, Inside Sojat Gate, Jodhpur.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Dr. Gajendra Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Arun Kumar, PP Nonepresent

¶10

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶11

Order

¶12

21/07/2022

¶13

This Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 03.05.2019 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Case No.99/2016, whereby the learned trial court closed the examination of the witness PW-1 Ritesh Chouhan and PW-2 Deep Singh.

¶14

Despite service, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the private respondents.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown from order dated 03.05.2019 that the advocate along with the application for exemption from appearance had appeared in the morning and the

¶16

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-3579/2019]

¶17

application was allowed by the court. It was also recorded by the court that the witnesses were not present. Thereafter, the court has recorded that in the morning time at 12:20 pm, the witnesses Deep Sing and Ritesh Chouhan have come and the counsel was called, but did not present.

¶18

On bare perusal of the order dated 03.05.2019, it reflects that the counsel for the petitioner was available with an application in the morning before the court, which was accepted and none of the witnesses were available. Subsequently, at the fag end of the morning hours, the witnesses arrived and the cross examination has been closed.

¶19

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed, while quashing and setting aside the order dated 03.05.2019 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Case No.99/2016, the learned trial court is directed to give one single opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine the witnesses PW-1 Ritesh Chouhan and PW-2 Deep Singh on a date to be fixed by the trial court.

¶20

All pending applications stand disposed of.

¶21

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶22

131-Zeeshan

Rakesh Soni v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Soni v. State

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

Anand Singh Vs State

Harvinder Singh @ Binder Singh Vs State

State Vs Buta Singh and Ors.

Pawan Kumar Vs Kulvindra Singh

Mahendra Singh Vs State and Ors.

Yunas Ali Vs Prakash Kothari