Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt Santosh vs State & Anr on 2 January, 2018
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 922 / 2016
Smt. Santosh, aged about 29 yearsW/o Sh. Mahendra Kumar, (D/o
Sh. Geega Ram) by caste Meghwal, resident of 98 Anand Nagar,
Near FCI Godown, In front of Ridhi Sidhi Textile, Pali, Tehsil &
District Pali (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through the learned Public Prosecutor.
2. Mahendra Kumar, aged about 33 a Ram, B/c Meghwal, R/o
Village Koorna, Tehsil & District Pali (Raj.)
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. N.S.Charan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.L.Chauhan and Mr. V.S.Rajpurohit, PP
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order 02/01/2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned P.P. Perused the material on record.
By way of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.c. the petitioner complainant has approached this Court for challenging the order dated 16.10.2014 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Pali in Cr. Revision No. 33/2014 whereby the Revisional Court accepted the revision of the respondent Mahendra Kumar and set aside the order dated 3.3.2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Pali in Cr. Regular case No. 39/2012 registered on the basis of F.R. No. 12/2008.
On going through the orders under challenge, it is apparent that the petitioner lodged an F.I.R. against the respondent (2 of 2) [CRLMP-922/2016] Mahendra Kumar after investigation whereof, the police filed a negative final report. Thereafter the petitioner submitted a protest petition and got herself examined in support thereof. The learned Magistrate proceeded to take cognizance against the respondent for the offence under Section 494 IPC by the order dated 3.3.2012. The said order was challenged in revision which came to be allowed as stated above.
This Court is of the firm opinion that the instant misc. petition is not maintainable as it is preferred against a final order passed by Revisional Court. That apart, on going through the orders under challenge, it is apparent that the petitioner complainant led no evidence whatsoever so as to give rise to even prima facie Satisfaction that respondent Mahendra Kumar contracted valid second marriage during his subsisting marriage with the petitioner. Thus, I find no reason to interfere in the order dated 16.10.2014 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Pali whereby the order dated 3.3.2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Pali was quashed.
Accordingly, the misc. petition is dismissed as being devoid of merit.
(SANDEEP MEHTA), J.
/sushil/