Dismissed

Krishna Murari v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC3 Apr 2024CRLR/826/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged rejection of protest petition and acceptance of final report in theft/misappropriation case. Court held impugned order just and proper, dismissing criminal revision without interference.

What did the court decide?

The instant criminal revision petition stands dismissed. Stay application and all other pending applications are also dismissed.

Krishna Murari Vs State and Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:15776]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 826/2005

¶4

Krishna Murari son of Shri Ram Gopal, resident of Sundalak, Police Station Baran, Distt.Baran

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Rajasthan through P.P. 2.Shyam Murari Meena S/o Shri Durga Shanker

¶8

Durga Shanker S/o Shri Bajrang Lal No.2 and 3, resident of Lolahedi, Teh. Atru, Distt. Baran

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶12

Order

¶13

03/04/2024

¶14

Aggrieved by the order dated 30.07.2005 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baran in FR No. 56/2005 and FIR No.318/2005 registered with Police Station, Kotwari, Baran, the instant criminal revision petition has been filed.

¶15

By passing the order dated 30.07.2005, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baran has rejected the protest petition filed by the petitioner and has accepted the final report submitted by the Investigating Agency.

¶16

Brief facts of the case are that the complainant-petitioner filed a complaint against the accused-respondents for the offence under Section 379 and 406 IPC alleging therein that, he is the owner of Hero Honda motorcycle bearing chassis No. 05 D 09 C 18444 and Engine No. 05 D 08 M 17842 and the same was

[2024:RJ-JP:15776]

[CRLR-826/2005]

(2 of 3)

insured by the New India Insurance Company. The accused took the aforesaid motorcycle from his house and refused to return the same.

¶21

Upon this report, the matter was sent for investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC to Police Station Kotwali, Baran, thereafter, the matter was thoroughly investigated from all corner and finally negative FR was submitted with the conclusion that the vehicle in question was not purchased by the petitioner. The vehicle in question was purchased by the accused respondent from Krishna Motors after making payment of Rs.20000/- but the bill of the same was taken in the name of the petitioner as the marriage of daughter of the accused-respondent was fixed to be solemnized with the petitioner. A finding has been recorded by the Investigating Agency that the bill in question was not bearing the signature of the purchaser i.e. the petitioner and the vehicle was purchased by the accusedrespondent for giving the same to the petitioner in the marriage, hence, under these circumstances, no offence was committed by them. Against the negative final report submitted by the police, the petitioner submitted protest petition and examined three witnesses and after considering their evidence, the learned trial Judge came to the conclusion that the vehicle in question was purchased by the accused-respondent but the bill of the same was taken in the name of the petitioner as the same was supposed to be given to him in the marriage but subsequently the engagement was broken and the marriage could not be solemnized, hence, the vehicle in question was taken by the respondent.

[2024:RJ-JP:15776]

[CRLR-826/2005]

(3 of 3)

After appreciating all these evidence, learned Magistrate has rightly accepted the final report submitted by the Investigating Agency and rejected the protest petition filed by the petitioner.

¶26

The order impugned is just and proper which requires no interference of this Court.

¶27

Accordingly, the instant criminal revision petition stands dismissed. Stay application and all application(s) (pending, if any) also stand dismissed.

¶28

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶29

MR/19

Krishna Murari v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Murari v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Income Tax Officer Vs Rajendra Prasad Vaish, S/O Shri Banshidhar Vaish

Vijay Chaturvedi S/O Late Shri V.D. Chaturvedi Vs State of Rajasthan

Mubin S/O Chahat Vs State of Rajasthan

Rambabu Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Nanhey Khaa Vs State

Kumher Vs State