Allowed

Nand Lal Sharma Son of Shri Vishambhar Dayal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 Jul 2023CRLAS/674/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal under Section 14A SC/ST (POA) Act challenged the charge-framing order dated 05.11.2022 as being non-speaking and without reasons, in contravention of Section 228 Cr.P.C. The High Court held that a trial court must assign reasons when framing charges. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.

What did the court decide?

The order of charge dated 05.11.2022 dated 05.11.2022 dated 05.11.2022 is set aside. The trial court is directed to rehear parties for charge consideration and pass a reasoned order.

Nand Lal Sharma Son of Shri Vishambhar Dayal Vs… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 674/2023

¶3

Nand Lal Sharma Son Of Shri Vishambhar Dayal, Resident Of B-54, Mahesh Nagar, 80Ft Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶4

Raghuveer Singh Son Of Surajbhan, Resident Of Village And Post Hameerpur Tehsil Bansoor, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

¶5

Sanjay Sharma Son Of Revadmal Sharma, Resident Of Alwar Road, Mohallan Holi Ka Tiba, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

¶6

----Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p

¶9

Lali Devi Wife Of Hanuman, Resident Of Village Harsora Tehsil Bansoor, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.G. Chopra, PP Mr. Anshul Sharma

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶13

Order

¶14

24/07/2023

¶15

Instant appeal under Section 14A of SC/ST (POA) Act is preferred aggrieved from order of charge dated 05.11.2022 in sessions case No. 74/2020 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST) POA Act Cases, Alwar whereby learned trial court framed charge for offence under Sections 323/34, 354/34 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

¶16

Learned counsel for appellant submitted that a criminal complaint on false ground was filed by complainant against appellants and after recording statement under Section 200

¶17

(2 of 3) [CRLAS-674/2023]

¶18

Cr.P.C., same was sent for further inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. On the basis of non-verified facts, order of cognizance was passed. Thereafter, learned trial court without considering the material available on record, had passed order to frame charge against appellants which is non-speaking order without assigning any reasoning for framing of charge. He specifically referred Sections 227 and 228 Cr.P.C., to submit that learned trial court was obliged to consider material available on record and also to assign summary reasons for framing charge against present appellants.

¶19

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that the stage of charge is not a mini-trial and whatsoever was considered by learned trial court was narrated in description of charge, therefore the provisions were complied with.

¶20

Having considered the submissions of learned counsels for parties and learned Public Prosecutor, I am of considered view that being a judicial institution it is duty of every Presiding Officer to assign the reasons in favour or against, on the basis of which order was passed. The assigning of reason is necessary for the parties so that they may know why the order was passed against him. At the stage of charge, the court was required to evaluate the material available before it to determine whether the facts emerging from the material, taken on its face value, disclose the necessary to constitute offence. The probative value of the materials has to be gone into but the law does not permit a mini trial at the stage of charge. Considering aforesaid analogy when we peruse impugned order in light of Section 228 of Cr.P.C. under

¶21

[CRLAS-674/2023]

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

Chapter XVIII, I am of considered view that the order passed by learned trial court sans reasons, hence on the ground of nonreasoned and cryptic order, the impugned order is liable to be interfered and present appeal deserves to be allowed.

¶24

As a result of aforesaid, present appeal preferred aggrieved from order of charge dated 05.11.2022 in sessions case No. 74/2020 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST) POA Act Cases, Alwar is allowed and order dated 05.11.2022 is set aside.

¶25

Learned trial court is directed to rehear the parties for consideration of charge and pass an appropriate reasoned order.

¶26

Accordingly, present appeal is allowed.

¶27

Misc. Application, if any, stands disposed of.

¶28

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶29

PREETI VALECHA /43

Nand Lal Sharma Son of Shri Vishambhar Dayal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nand Lal Sharma Son of Shri Vishambhar Dayal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopal Gurjar S/O Kesar Lal Gurjar Vs Ram Sahai S/O Arjana Ram Gurjar

Girraj Son of Gopal Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramlal S/O Harikishan Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajesh Mahawar S/O Kaluram B/C Koli Vs State of Rajasthan

Chandra Prakash S/O Daluram Lashkari Vs State of Rajasthan through P.P.

Babu Lal S/O Kallu Vs State of Rajasthan