Dismissed

Koshindra Allias Sikandra and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

Rajasthan HC16 May 2024CRLR/1197/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court Common Judgment disposed of two connected criminal revision petitions challenging the framing of charges. Ruling that only a prima facie case is needed at this stage, the Court found no error in the impugned orders framing charges for murder, conspiracy, and attempted murder under the IPC and dismissed both petitions.

What did the court decide?

Revision petitions dismissed; stay applications and all pending applications also dismissed.

Koshindra Allias Sikandra and Ors. Vs State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1265/2019

¶3

Surendra Kumar @ Murli S/o Srichand R/o Near Jeen Mata Temple, Chanana, PS Chirawa District Jhujhunu Raj,.

¶4

----Petitioner/accused

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent/Complainant

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1197/2017

¶10

Koshindra @ Sikandra S/o Rohtash R/o Village Loyal, P.S. Khetri Nagar, District Jhunjhunu.

¶11

Dilip Gurjar S/o Amar Singh R/o Village Chanana P.S. Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu

¶12

Karamveer @ Jagmal S/o Rohitash, R/o Village Loyal, P.S. Khetri Nagar, District Jhunjhunu.

¶13

----Petitioners

¶14

Versus

¶15

State Of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶16

----Respondent

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Matolia Ms. Karishma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Imran Khan-PP

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶19

Order

¶20

16/05/2024

¶21

Since common questions of law and facts are involved in both the petitions and they are arising out of the impugned orders by which the charges have been framed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 396/120-B, 302/120-B and 307/120-B IPC, hence with the consent of counsel

¶22

[CRLR-1265/2019]

¶23

(2 of 3)

¶24

for the appellant, both petitions are being decided by this common order.

¶25

By passing the impugned orders dated 15.01.2019 and 19.05.2017 charges have been framed against petitioners for the offences, stated above.

¶26

Counsel for the petitioners submits that no offence is made out against the petitioners, as stated above and even then the charges have been framed against them. Hence under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted.

¶27

It has been apprised at Bar that during pendency of these petitions, one of the petitioner i.e Koshindra @ Sikandra has expired.

¶28

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioners and submitted that there is ample evidence which shows prima facie involvement of the petitioners in the alleged incident and the trial Court has not committed any error in framing the charges against the petitioners. Hence under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted.

¶29

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record.

¶30

Perusal of the impugned orders indicate that upon finding prima facie case against the petitioners, on the basis of the evidence of witnesses, enclosed with the chargesheet and other material available on record, the learned Trial Judge has framed the charges against the petitioners for the offences as stated above.

¶31

[CRLR-1265/2019]

¶32

(3 of 3)

¶33

It is settled proposition of law that at the stage of framing of charges, only prima facie case is required to be seen and meticulous examination of the evidence of the prosecution is not required to be seen as that is required to be seen by the trial Court, at the appropriate stage of trial. This Court finds no error in the impugned orders passed by the Courts below.

¶34

Both revision petitions are found to be devoid of merit and the same are hereby dismissed.

¶35

Stay applications and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed.

¶36

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶37

Ashu/39-40

Koshindra Allias Sikandra and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Koshindra Allias Sikandra and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan through P P

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

Radhey Shyam Vs State

Babli Devi W/O Pawan Kumar B/C Dhanka Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Badrinarayan Gehlot S/O Lt. Shri Bhanu Ram B/C Mali Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramkesh S/O Motiram B/C Mali Vs State of Rajasthan

Arbab Khan @ Shanu S/O Amanatullah Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Tejpal S/O Ram Bharosi Vs State of Rajasthan State