Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Kishan Lal Meena vs State And Ors on 30 September, 2024
Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha
[2024:RJ-JP:41372]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 77/2005
Kishan Lal Meena S/o Mool Chand Meena, R/o Khund Jatoli, Tehsil
Baswa District, Dausa.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through PP
2. Sukh Lal S/o Mool Chand @ Moolya
3. Gopal S/o Mool Chand adopted S/o Dalya Ram
4. Ramhet S/o Mool Chand
5. Shravan S/o Mool Chand
6. Prabhu S/o Har Sahai
7. Nanda @ Nanag Ram S/o Har Sahai
8. Khem Chand S/o Har Sahai
9. Manohar S/o Sukhapal
10. Heera Lal S/o Sukhpal
All resident of Rajwas P.S. Bandikui Distrist Dausa.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Saundrya Verma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jtiendra Singh Rathore, Addl. G.A
Mr. Syed Adeel Naqvi, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
DATE OF JUDGMENT 30/09/2024
Instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner
under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 against the judgment dated 07.07.2004 passed
by Special Judge, SC/ST (POA Cases) Dausa in Criminal Case
No.44/2003, whereby the accused-respondent Nos.2 to 10 (for
short 'the accused-respondents') have been acquitted of the
charge for the offence under Sections 147, 447, 427, 379 IPC and
Sections 3(1)(V), 3 (1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
(Downloaded on 12/10/2024 at 11:46:04 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:41372] (2 of 4) [CRLR-77/2005]
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
lodged an FIR against the accused-respondents at Police Station
Bandikui. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the
accused-respondents for the offence under Sections 147, 447,
427, 379 IPC and Sections 3(1)(V), 3 (1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
After that, the trial Court vide judgment dated 07.07.2004
acquitted the accused-respondents for the alleged offence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court had
committed error in acquitting the accused-respondents.
Prosecution has proved the case beyond the reasonable doubt.
Although, there are minor infirmities and contradictions in the
statement of the witnesses, but as a whole the evidence clearly
proved the case against the accused-respondents. Learned
counsel for the petitioner also submits that trial Court wrongly
believed on the testimony of the Patwari, whereas his statement
was false and on that basis he was suspended from the
Department. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that by way of evidence, the petitioner proved the possession over
the Sivai Chak land Khasra No.459/1533. Tehsildar had
recommended for regularization of the said land in the name of
the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that
accused-respondents had no possession over the disputed land.
They encroached on the disputed land. So, order of the trial Court
be set aside and accused-respondents be convicted for the offence
under Sections 147, 447, 427, 379 IPC and Sections 3(1)(V), 3
(1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
Learned counsel for the respondents have opposed the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and
(Downloaded on 12/10/2024 at 11:46:04 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:41372] (3 of 4) [CRLR-77/2005]
submit that the petitioner failed to prove the possession over the
disputed land. As per the statement of the Patwari, accused-
respondent No.3-Gopal had possession over the disputed land and
he exhibited the receipts regarding penalty deposited by
respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits
that prosecution witnesses PW1-Ramkaran, PW2- Murlidhar and
PW3-Devki Nandan had not supported the story of the
prosecution. So, the learned trial Court rightly acquitted the
accused-respondents. So, the present petition being devoid of
merit, is liable to be dismissed.
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for the respondents
and perused the impugned order.
During the pendency of the revision petition respondent No.3-Gopal and respondent No.5-Shravan died, therefore the present revision petition qua respondent No.3 and 5 has been rendered infructuous.
So far as the other respondent Nos.2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 are the concerned, the contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner was in possession over the Sivai Chak land of Khasra No.459/1533 but during the course of evidence petitioner failed to prove the possession over the said disputed land. Respondents exhibited the receipts of penalty deposited by them on account of possession over the disputed land. The prosecution witnesses had not supported the story of the prosecution. The petitioner also failed to prove that respondents took the goods from the disputed land which was in his possession. So, in my considered opinion, trial court had not committed any error in acquitting the accused- (Downloaded on 12/10/2024 at 11:46:04 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:41372] (4 of 4) [CRLR-77/2005] respondents for the offence under Sections 147, 447, 427, 379 IPC and Sections 3(1)(V), 3 (1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act. So, the present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J AVINASH GULERIA /11 (Downloaded on 12/10/2024 at 11:46:04 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)