Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dharampal vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 7 August, 2023
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2023:RJ-JD:24948]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 837/2018
Dharampal D/o Aad Ram, Aged About 40 Years, B/c Jat , Banda ,
Tehsil Taranagar Distt. Churu
----Appellant
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Rekha W/o Ramswaroop, B/c Meghwal, Shyopura, Tehsil
Taranagar, Distt Churu
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1251/2018
Rekha W/o Shri Ram Swroop, Aged About 20 Years, B/c
Meghwal, R/o Village Sheopura, P.s. Tara Nagar, Teh. Tara Nagar,
Dist. Churu (Raj.)
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Shri Dharam Pal S/o Sh. Aad Ram, B/c Jat R/o Village
Banada, Teh. Tara Nagar, Dist. Churu
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.S. Choudhary
Mr. Jai Kishan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shambhoo Singh
Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT RESERVED ON ::: 18/07/2023
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON ::: 07/08/2023
BY THE COURT:-
1. The legality correctness and propriety of the order dated 23.07.2018 passed by the learned Magistrate has been challenged (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 03:57:21 AM) [2023:RJ-JD:24948] (2 of 4) [CRLAS-837/2018] by the accused appellant-Dharampal (In SB Crl. Revision Petition No.837/2018) as well as by the complainant Smt. Rekha Meghwal (In SB Crl. Revision Petition No.1251/2018) whereby the learned Judge accepted the protest petiton filed by the complainant and rejected the final report filed in FIR No.55/2018 registered at the Police Station Taranagar, District Churu and issued warrant of arrest against the accused Dharampal.
2. With the consent of the parties, both these appeals are being decided by this common order.
3. It is appearing that at the behest of complainant Rekha Meghwal, an FIR No.55/2018 came to be lodged at the Police Station Taranagar, District Churu alleging inter alia that she was subjected to rape by Dharampal. The matter was thoroughly investigated by the police and whereafter a negative final report came to be submitted in the competent Court.
4. The complainant Rekha Meghwal, appellant in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1251/2018 made protest to the Final Report upon which, the inquiry was initiated. After examination of the material, the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) Cases, Churu took cognizance of the offences under Sections 452 and 354 of the IPC and under Section 3 (1)(w)of the SC/ST Act and then issued process against the accused Dharmpal (who is appellant in Appeal No.837/2018) and issued warrant of arrest against him.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned as well as other material available on record. (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 03:57:21 AM) [2023:RJ-JD:24948] (3 of 4) [CRLAS-837/2018]
6. It is the grief of the complainant Rekha Meghwal (appellant in Appeal No.1251/2018) that besides the offences under Sections 452 & 354 of the IPC and Section 3 (1)(w) of the SC/ST Act, the cognizance under Sections 450, 457, 376 of the IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act may also be taken. I see no force in the prayer made by the complainant-Rekha Meghwal thus, the Appeal No.1251/2018 filed by her devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed.
7. With regard to the appeal preferred by accused-Dharmpal, who challenged the order impugned is concerned, this Court is of the firm opinion that at the stage of considering a case of cognizance, the evidence collected is not required to be examined to the extent that the accused shall be convicted or acquitted. While taking cognizance of the offence, it is enough if the Magistrate or the Judge feels to proceed further in the matter, as per the procedure laid down under the Cr.P.C. It is a formal application of mind prima facie to see material so as to take cognizance of the offence and issuance of process. This Court does not find any illegality or error in the order dated 23.07.2018 passed by the Court below thus, the Appeal No.837/2018 filed by the accused-Dharampal is dismissed being devoid of force, as. The stay petition also stands disposed of.
8. Looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case that after investigation it was resulted and opined by the Investigating Officer that the accused Dharampal had not committed any offence, I deem it appropriate to direct him to appear before the trial Court on or before 31.08.2023 and to move (Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 03:57:21 AM) [2023:RJ-JD:24948] (4 of 4) [CRLAS-837/2018] a regular bail application. In the event, the accused-Dharampal appears and move a regular bail application to the learned Judge, he shall be released on the very same day on the amount of surety and bond which the learned trial Court deems appropriate. Till 31.08.2023, the execution of warrant of arrest issued against the accused Dharampal shall remain stayed.
10. So far as the appellant Rekha in Appeal No.1251/2018 is concerned, she would also be at liberty to make a prayer under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. after examination of the relevant witnesses in the trial and if the material is found to be up to standard marked by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Hardeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Others, (2014) 3 SCC 92; wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the petitioner would be able to move an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Needless to say that in the above circumstance, the application as would be filed by the petitioner under Section 319 C.P.C. shall be decided by the learned trial Court in light of the settled legal preposition.
10. With the above observations and directions, the appeals are disposed of.
11. Record of the Court below be sent back.
(FARJAND ALI),J 240-Mamta/-
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 03:57:21 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)