Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAVINDRA SINGH versus STATE

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


RAVINDRA SINGH v STATE - CRLR Case No. 351 of 2006 [2007] RD-RJ 2596 (10 May 2007)

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition NO.351/2006

(Ravindra Singh Vs. State & Ors.)

Date of order : 10.5.2007

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS

Mr. Niranjan Singh, for the petitioner.

Mr. Ashok Upadhyay, Public Prosecutor.

Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, for the non-petitioner No.2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the impugned order dated 21.3.2006 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) & Judicial Magistrate, No.3,

Jodhpur.

In the present case, from the perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that at the time of passing of impugned order, the evidence on record was not considered by the Magistrate and further, at the time of passing the impugned oder, it was observed by the Magistrate that "

""

It is very strange that the learned

Magistrate instead of considering the entire evidence has passed the impugned order on the basis of the fact that the final report in the matter has been given by the Dy. Inspector General of Police, Police Range,

Jodhpur. It is true that the Dy. Inspector General of

Police, Police Range, Jodhpur is having supervisory jurisdiction but if any adjudication is made by him with regard to the investigation conducted by the

Investigating Officer, the same cannot be treated to be an evidence at the time of passing any judicial order by the Court in the matter. The Magistrate is required to discuss the evidence which is on record and thereafter, he is required to give conclusion, which is totally absent in the present case.

In the circumstances, the order impugned dated 21.3.2006 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) &

Judicial Magistrate, No.3, Jodhpur is set aside and the case is remitted to the concerned Magistrate for passing a fresh order with the direction to consider the entire evidence of the case, ignoring the fact that the Dy. Inspector General of Police, Police

Range, Jodhpur has given Final Report in the matter.

With these directions, the revision petition is allowed. Record of the case be sent back forthwith to the concerned Magistrate.

(GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J . arun


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.