Disposed¶21

Mukesh Soni S/O Shri Radheyshyam Soni, v. Mohan Singh Sankhla S/O Shri Rampratap Sankhla

Rajasthan HC16 May 2025CRLMP/2892/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan HC Jaipur; S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2892/2025; Justice Sameer Jain; decided 16/05/2025; challenge to Magistrate's order rejecting application to produce witness Lal Chand Sharma; failure to file list of evidence and closure of evidence opportunity; no interference with trial court order; liberty to argue before trial court; duty to consider submissions and objections; fair trial; petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make submissions before the concerned Court; that Court is to duly consider the submissions along with the potential objections of the opposing party and make an appropriate determination to ensure a fair trial; pending applications, if any, stand disposed. ¶21

Mukesh Soni S/O Shri Radheyshyam Soni, Vs Mohan Singh Sankhla S/O Shri Rampratap Sankhla — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 05.04.2025 of the Special Judicial Magistrate, dismissing the petitioner's application to produce Lal Chand Sharma as a witness after closure of the petitioner's evidence opportunity, warrants interference by the High Court.

¶15

Court's answer

This Court finds no reason to interfere with the findings and observations of the impugned order of the Special Judicial Magistrate dismissing the application to produce Lal Chand Sharma as a witness.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

In the interest of justice and to ensure a fair trial, the petitioner is granted liberty to make submissions before the concerned Court, which is directed to duly consider the arguments/submissions advanced by the petitioner, taking note of the potential objections raised by the opposing party, and make an appropriate determination.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2892/2025 (Sameer Jain, J.; decided 16/05/2025): Petitioner challenged the order dated 05.04.2025 of the Special Judicial Magistrate dismissing his application to produce Lal Chand Sharma as a witness. Counsel admitted that the petitioner had not presented his list of evidence, whereupon his opportunity to give evidence was closed, and that the application for the witness was moved only on 05.10.2024. Holding there was no ground to interfere with the impugned order, the Court nevertheless granted the petitioner liberty to advance submissions before the trial Court and directed that Court to duly consider those submissions together with any objections of the opposing party and pass an appropriate determination so as to ensure a fair trial. The petition was disposed of accordingly, with pending applications also standing disposed.

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:20719]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2892/2025

¶4

Mukesh Soni S/o Shri Radheyshyam Soni, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of 117, Parivahan Nagar, Khatipura Road, Khatipura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mohan Singh Sankhla S/o Shri Rampratap Sankhla, Aged About 48 Years, Resident Of Village Gunawata, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Yaduvanshi For Respondent(s) :

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶11

Judgment

¶12

16/05/2025

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order dated 05.04.2025 passed by Special Judicial Magistrate, whereby, application filed by the petitioner for producing Lal Chand Sharma as witness was dismissed.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has admitted the fact that list of evidence was not presented by the petitioner. Thereafter, opportunity qua the complainant/petitioner to give evidence was closed. It is further admitted that the petitioner has filed an application on 05.10.2024 for producing above named as witness.

¶15

Lastly, it is submitted that the learned Trial Court has dismissed the said application of the petitioner without appreciating the material available on record.

[2025:RJ-JP:20719]

[CRLMP-2892/2025]

(2 of 2)

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, upon perusal of material available on record, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the findings and observation of the impugned order.

¶20

Howsoever, in the interest of justice, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to make their submissions before the concerned Court and the said Court is hereby directed to duly consider the arguments/submissions advanced by the petitioner, taking note of the potential objections raised by the opposing party, and make an appropriate determination to ensure fair trial.

¶21

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed.

¶22

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶23

DEEPAK/63

Mukesh Soni S/O Shri Radheyshyam Soni, v. Mohan Singh Sankhla S/O Shri Rampratap Sankhla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Soni S/O Shri Radheyshyam Soni, v. Mohan Singh Sankhla S/O Shri Rampratap Sankhla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ishwar Singh S/O Shri Prem Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh Sharma S/O Shri Om Prakash Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Kajodi Devi Wife of Shri Kailash Chand, Vs State of Rajasthan

Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajuray S/O Shri Amalray, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramnaresh Son of Kedarlal, Vs State of Rajasthan