Single judge of Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur rejected the substantive criminal miscellaneous petition challenging an order quashing charges. The revisional court had found no documentary evidence affixed to respondents. With no petitioner appearance, the court upheld the impugned order, found it lawful and rejected the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JD:1088]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6222/2021
Karni Singh S/o Shri Laxman Singh, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 48A, Krishna Nagar, Kuri Bhagtasani, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP Mr. Naman Mohnot
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS
Order
08/01/2024
This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 06.09.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur Metropolitan (hereinafter referred to as the learned Revisional Court). In criminal revision petition No. 18/2018 whereby, learned Revisional Court allowed the revision petition and partly set aside the order framing charges against the respondent nos. 2 and 3 for the offences under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B IPC while partly affirming the order dated 27.02.2018 discharging the respondent nos. 2 and 3 from the offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC passed by the learned Additional
[2024:RJ-JD:1088]
[CRLMP-6222/2021]
(2 of 3)
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CBI Cases), Jodhpur Metropolitan (hereinafter referred to as learned trial Court) in criminal original case No. 50/2017.
[2024:RJ-JD:1088]
[CRLMP-6222/2021]
(3 of 3)
(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J
205-Dinesh/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the revision order quashing charges for lack of documentary evidence signed by respondents.
Whether the impugned order of the revisional court is prima facie just, proper, reasonable and lawful.
Whether the petition filed under Section 482 CrPC should be allowed or rejected.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Karni Singh
Anshul Siroya
Mahesh Chand Kochar
Madan Gopal Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
