Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JAMNA versus STATE AND ORS

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


JAMNA v STATE AND ORS - CRLR Case No. 1359 of 2006 [2007] RD-RJ 1581 (2 April 2007)

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

ORDER

S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1359/2006

JAMNA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

DATE: 02.04.2007.

HON'BLE MR. K.S. RATHORE, J.

Mr. Kamlakar Sharma for the accused-petitioner.

Mr. B.S. Chhaba, Public Prosecutor for the State.

Mr. Karanpal Singh for the complainant.

****

The present criminal revision petition under

Section 397 r/w Section 401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 02.11.2006 passed by the Additional

District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Hindauncity in

Criminal Case No. 21/2006, whereby the Court below has allowed the application filed by the prosecution under

Section 319 Cr.P.C. and framed charges against the accused-petitioner under Sections 147, 341, 323, 302/149 IPC and cognizance was taken against the petitioner and arrest warrants have been issued.

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the injury which was attributed to the petitioner was not grievous in nature and looking to the post-mortem report of the deceased Nihal Singh, death was caused on account of the head injury, whereas allegations against the petitioner is that she

(2) attributed injury on the head of Raju which was simple in nature.

I have heard rival submissions of the respective parties and have also gone through the impugned order dated 02.11.2006.

The application of the prosecution filed under

Section 319 Cr.P.C. has been allowed as the petitioner's name finds place in the FIR and the witnesses also mentioned the name of the petitioner in their statements.

I find no illegality in the impugned order dated 02.11.2006 allowing the application of the prosecution filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. and at this stage no interference whatsoever is required by this

Court.

Consequently, the revision petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed.

I have already converted the arrest warrants into bailable warrants.

(K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.