Allowed

Laxmi Devi Wife of Poonam Chand v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 Nov 2023CRLR/329/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed S.B. criminal revision petition framed against accused petitioners during Sessions case filed by State of Rajasthan against accused under Prevention of Atrocities Act. Impugned order of framing charges was set aside and case remanded to trial Court for fresh order based on similar precedent.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 29.09.2022 passed by the trial Court was set aside. The matter was remanded back to the learned trial Court to pass a fresh order on the charge.

Laxmi Devi Wife of Poonam Chand Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:35182]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 329/2023

¶4

Laxmi Devi wife of Poonam Chand, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 62, Jagmalpura Road, Near Khatikan Pyau, Sikar, Police Station Kotwali Sikar, District Sikar (Raj)

¶5

Mahendra son of Poonam Chand, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 62, Jagmalpura Road, Near Khatikan Pyau, Sikar, Police Station Kotwali Sikar, District Sikar (Raj)

¶6

Jitendra son of Ganpat Ram, Resident of Dal Singh Colony, Jagmalpura Road, Sikaer Police Station Kotwali Sikar District Sikar (Raj)

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor

¶10

Prakash son of Shri Panna Lal, aged 45 years, resident of Bherupura Kachcha Rasta, Jagmalpura road, Sikar, Police Station Kotwali, Sikar District Sikar (Raj.)

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ripu Daman Singh Naruka, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, P.P.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order

¶14

20/11/2023 :

¶15

Instant revision petition under Section 397 readwith Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred on behalf of accused-petitioners against the order dated 29.09.2022 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Sikar, in Sessions Case No.312/2021, titled as State Vs. Anil Kumar @ Bhola, whereby the charges were framed against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 427 & 308 of Indian Penal Code.

[2023:RJ-JP:35182]

[CRLR-329/2023]

(2 of 3)

Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioners submits that the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court is legally not sustainable being contrary to law, as the said Court has committed serious error of law in framing charges against the petitioners for the alleged offences. Counsel further submits that the revision petition being S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.1173/2022 filed on behalf of the co-accused, namely Poonam Chand, has already been allowed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 10.02.2023, while remanding the matter back to the learned trial Court & setting aside the order of framing charges, and the case of the present petitioners is on same footing, hence, the revision petition may be allowed and the impugned order dt.29.09.2022 passed by the learned trial be quashed & set aside, while discharging the petitioners from all the charges.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the submissions made herein-above and prayed for dismissal of the present petition.

¶21

Despite service of notice, no one is present on behalf of the respondent No.2.

¶22

Heard learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Perused the material made available on record, impugned order dt.29.09.2022 passed by the trial Court and the order cited here-in-above.

¶23

As per submissions of learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioners, the evidence available on record were not appreciated by the learned trial Court. The injury caused to injured Manohar Lal on the head by blunt-weapon was simple in nature, which does not fall within the ambit of Section 308 of I.P.C.

[2023:RJ-JP:35182]

[CRLR-329/2023]

(3 of 3)

Considering the submissions made at bar, looking into the facts & circumstances of the case and the fact that the case of the present petitioners also stands on similar footing and squarely covered by the case of co-accused, namely Poonam Chand (supra), this Court is of the view that the present revision petition deserves to be allowed, while setting aside the order of framing charges & remanding the matter back to the learned trial Court for passing a fresh order on the charge.

¶28

Consequently, the present petition is allowed . Impugned order dt.29.09.2022 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned trial Court to pass a fresh order on the charge without being influenced by any of our observations & proceed further in the matter in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 20.12.2023.

¶29

Miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶30

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶31

ASHOK/96

Laxmi Devi Wife of Poonam Chand v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmi Devi Wife of Poonam Chand 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

Ashok Puri S/O Ramniwas Puri @ Niwas Puri Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohit @ Cheri S/O Ramavtar @ Gulip Vs State of Rajasthan

Hitesh Meena @ Hemraj Meena Son of Chetram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Prem Singh Rohisa Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Tapesh Kotiya S/O Late Shri Koushal Kumar Kotiya Vs State of Rajasthan

Tahir Khan S/O Mehtab Vs State of Rajasthan