Allowed

Meka Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Aug 2023CRLMP/3244/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the Additional Session Judge's order rejecting the petitioner's application under Section 233 Cr.P.C. The court held that the Investigating Officer was crucial for the petitioner to prove his innocence and directed the trial court to recall the witness immediately.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 20.04.2019 is set aside and the trial court is directed to call SI Nitin Dave for defence evidence immediately.

Meka Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:25932]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3244/2019

¶4

Meka Ram S/o Birbal Ram, Aged About 40 Years, B/c Vishnoi, R/o Soda Ki Dhani, Ps Pipar City, Dist Jodhpur

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

Omprakash S/o Shri Ghevarram, B/c Vishnoi, Aged 35 years, R/o Sanghasani, PS Luni, District Jodhpur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chiranjilal Mali For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi, PP Mr. JS Choudhary, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Pradeep Choudhary

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶12

Order

¶13

17/08/2023

¶14

Instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 20.04.2019, passed by learned Additional Session Judge (Women Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur Metropolitan whereby the learned Judge rejected the petitioner’s application filed under Section 233 Cr.P.C. for calling the S.I. Nitin Dave for defence evidence.

¶15

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the witness SI Nitin Dave was the Investigating Officer in FIR No.267/2011 registered at PS Mahila Thana, Jodhpur for offence under Sections 498A, 406, 306, 341 IPC, who after investigation filed charge-sheet No.295/2011 before the competent court. Counsel submits that the Investigating Officer of the present case has filed the statements of the witnesses recorded in FIR No.267/2011 by SI

[2023:RJ-JD:25932]

[CRLMP-3244/2019]

(2 of 3)

Nitin Dave along with the charge-sheet of the present case. Therefore, in order to prove his innocence, the evidence of SI Nitin Dave is very much important. But, the learned trial court without assigning any reason, rejected the petitioner’s application. Therefore, it is prayed that the impugned order may be quashed and the SI Nitin Dave may be called for his defence evidence.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have opposed the prayed made by counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the learned trial court has rightly rejected the petitioner’s application under Section 233 of Cr.P.C. and thus requires no interference from this Court.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned.

¶22

Since the witness SI Nitin Dave was the Investigating Officer in FIR No.267/2011 registered at PS Mahila Thana, Jodhpur for offence under Sections 498A, 406, 307 IPC, who after investigation filed charge-sheet No.295/2011 before the competent court and he recorded the statements of the witnesses, therefore, in order to prove his innocence, the petitioner wants to produce his evidence which is necessary for just and proper decision and since the petitioner is facing trial for offence under Section 306 Cr.P.C., therefore, he has a valuable right to call SI Nitin Dave as defence witness to justify his case.

¶23

In view of above, the impugned order dated 20.04.2019, passed by learned Additional Session Judge (Women Atrocities Cases) Jodhpur Metropolitan is hereby set aside. The trial court is directed to call SI Nitin Dave for defence evidence immediately.

[2023:RJ-JD:25932]

[CRLMP-3244/2019]

(3 of 3)

The misc. petition is allowed accordingly. Stay application is

¶28

also decided.

¶29

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶30

534-MS/-

Meka Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meka Ram 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

Priyanka Ramawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Jyoti Tripathi Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Shakuntala Vs State of Rajasthan

Shanti Lal and Ors. Vs State of Raj. and Ors.

Babu Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kishan Lal Vs State of Rajasthan