Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Kanhaiyalal Kumawat vs State Of Rajasthan . on 26 September, 2016
Bench: Ranjan Gogoi, Prafulla C. Pant
ITEM NO.32 COURT NO.5 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO(S). 2482/2012
(ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 17/08/2011
IN CRMP NO. 422/2006 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR)
KANHAIYALAL KUMAWAT & ORS. PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
(WITH OFFICE REPORT)
WITH
SLP(CRL) NO. 2644/2012
(WITH OFFICE REPORT)
Date : 26/09/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT
For parties (s) Mr. Niraj Gupta, Adv.(N/P)
Mr. Pramod Dayal, Adv.
Mr. Nikunj Dayal, Adv.
Ms. Payal Dayal, Adv.
Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, AAG
Mr. Puneet Parihar, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Verma, Adv.
Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv.(N/P)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Learned counsel for the petitioners – complainants is not present.
Signature Not Verified
We have heard the learned counsels for the Digitally signed by VINOD LAKHINA Date: 2016.09.28 respondents.
16:29:39 IST Reason:
Page No.1 of 2
We have perused the order of the High Court and the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 2 and
3. We have taken note of the details of the civil suit mentioned in paragraph 28 of the said counter affidavit.
On such consideration, we are of the view that the present dispute between the parties is civil in nature. That apart, it is mentioned on behalf of the respondent accused that the matter has been settled between the parties.
In the totality of the above facts, we are of the view that the present Special Leave Petitions are without any merit and are not required to be entertained any further. The Special Leave Petitions are accordingly dismissed.
[VINOD LAKHINA] [ASHA SONI]
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
Page No.2 of 2