Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Rambharosi Lal Garg S/O Shri Brijlal ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 20 September, 2022
Author: Birendra Kumar
Bench: Birendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6894/2022
Rambharosi Lal Garg S/o Shri Brijlal Garg, R/o B-129, Dev
Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur At Present Retired Executive Engineer
And Investigation And Development Officer, Sahibi Nadi
Pariyojna Forest Department, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR Order 20/09/2022 The petitioner is facing trial in connection with case No. 38/2022 for offences under Prevention of Corruption Act. Aforesaid trial arises out of FIR No. 145/1996. Charge against the petitioner is that in between 1970 to 1996, petitioner being executive engineer acquired property disproportionate to the known source of his income. Petitioner filed income tax return of the assessment year 1963-64, 1964-65, 1973-74, 1974-75 in the name of M/s Sanwardas Brijlal, a Hindu Undivided Family. Brijlal was father of the petitioner and Sanwaldas was uncle of the petitioner.
By the impugned order dated 12.07.2022 court below refused to take those documents on record on the ground that the same does not relate to the petitioner as it is not in the name of (Downloaded on 23/09/2022 at 01:10:32 AM) (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6894/2022] the petitioner nor the same relate to the relevant period, i.e. 1970-1996.
Probative value of any evidence and its admissibility stands on different footing. No trial court can debar any party from bringing oral and documentary evidences on the record as desired by the party. The relevancy of document brought and its probative value would be considered only at the stage of final judgment. If the trial courts are permitted to stop the parties from bringing evidence, on the record it may lead to miscarriage of justice as the superior courts would be deprived of the opportunity to examine whether those evidences were relevant or not or had any probative value or not and whether non-acceptance or non consideration of the same by the trial Judge was just and proper or not.
Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable in law and is hereby quashed and petition is allowed.
Let the referred documents be exhibited according to law on behalf of the accused.
(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J ashu /94 (Downloaded on 23/09/2022 at 01:10:32 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)