Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ram Niwas vs State on 25 July, 2022

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1319/2012

Ram Niwas
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State
                                                                  ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Vivek Mathur for
                                 Mr. Pradeep Shah
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP



     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order 25/07/2022 The petitioner has preferred this misc. petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C., claiming for the following reliefs :-

"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this misc. petition may kindly be allowed and the order dated 21.1.2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Anoopgarh taking cognizance of offence under Section 175 Cr. P.C., as also the order dated 18.4.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Anoopgarh, District Sri Ganganagar dismissing the revision petition challenging the order dated 21.1.2011 taking cognizance of the offence may kindly be quashed and set aside and the proceedings pending against the petitioner in pursuance of regular criminal case No.3/2011 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Anoopgarh may kindly be ordered to be dropped." (Downloaded on 26/07/2022 at 08:49:28 PM)
(2 of 2) [CRLMP-1319/2012] Counsel for the petitioner submits that cognizance under Section 175 IPC is not made out as the petitioner was a public servant and not seized of the public record.
On seeking record, this Court finds that the learned Authority initiating proceedings, however, has observed that it was the petitioner who was suppose to furnish record in-question and his not doing so was contrary to law.
This Court finds that the proceedings under Section 175 IPC at this stage do not call for any interference as the petitioner was requisite Authority holding the record in-question, thus, is not inclined to entertain the misc. petition.
The misc. petition is dismissed.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
114-Sanjay/-
(Downloaded on 26/07/2022 at 08:49:28 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)