Partly allowed

Heena Kumari v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Feb 2024CRLMP/1082/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court held that an order under Sections 97-98 CrPC is not interlocutory and cannot be challenged via Section 482 CrPC. However, the petition is disposed of with liberty to file a revision in the competent court. Stay application disposed concurrently.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to prefer revision before competent court; stay application disposed accordingly.

Heena Kumari Vs State of Rajasthan — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:8335]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1082/2024

¶4

Heena Kumari D/o Kalu Ram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Raiko Ka Baas Kharda Tehsil Pali Dist Pali

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh Dist Rajsamand 3. Naresh Salvi S/o Bherulal Salvi, R/o Narena P.s Charbhuja Dist Rajsamand (Raj)

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶12

Order

¶13

16/02/2024

¶14

The instant criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the notice and proceedings initiated under Sections 97 and 98, CrPC dated 19.01.2024 issued by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kumbhalgarh, Rajsamand through Police Station- Charbhuja.

¶15

At the outset, learned Public Prosecutor raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the present miscellaneous petition. It is submitted that the notice under Sections 97-98, CrPC is a final order against which a revision lies before the competent Court and hence, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is not maintainable.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner opposed the submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor and it is submitted that the

[2024:RJ-JD:8335]

[CRLMP-1082/2024]

(2 of 3)

present miscellaneous petition is maintainable. It is submitted that an order under Sections 97 and 98, CrPC is an interlocutory order, therefore, the said order can be challenged only by way of filing a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482, CrPC.

¶21

I have heard arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶22

In Rama Chandra Sahoo v. State of Orissa reported in MANU/OR/0054/2013, Hon’ble Odisha High Court has held that a proceeding under Section 97, CrPC is not by way of an interim application filed in another proceeding, but is an independent proceeding, which stands terminated by passing of an order in that regard. Thus, an order under Section 97, CrPC cannot be termed as an “interlocutory order”. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced below:

¶23

“9….The said decision has no application to the facts and circumstances of the case inasmuch as the petitioners are neither kidnappers of the child-Satyaprakash and their custody of the child cannot be said to be wholly illegal and that the proceeding under Section 97, Cr.P.C. is not by way of an interim application filed in another proceeding, but an independent proceeding which has stood terminated by passing of the impugned order. In the circumstances, the impugned order cannot be termed as

¶24

interlocutory. The contention of the learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 regarding maintainability of the revision therefore fails.”

¶25

(emphasis supplied)

¶26

In light of the aforesaid discussion, the present misc. petition is disposed of with a liberty to petitioner to prefer revision before the learned Court of competent jurisdiction. If any revision petition is filed by the petitioner, then the learned Court shall decide the

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:8335]

[CRLMP-1082/2024]

same on its merits including the question of limitation, if any, raised.

¶31

Stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶33

276-CPG/-

Heena Kumari v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heena Kumari 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

Sumitra Vs State of Rajasthan

Pathan Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Radha Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Ankush Shah Vs State of Rajasthan through Station House Officer

Mamta Giri Vs State of Rajasthan