Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SATYANARAIN AGARWAL versus STATE AND ANR

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SATYANARAIN AGARWAL v STATE AND ANR - CRLMP Case No. 1513 of 2006 [2007] RD-RJ 5504 (20 November 2007)

CMP 1513/06

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH

S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.1513/06

Satya Narain Agarwal Versus State & Anr.

DATE OF ORDER :: 20/11/2007

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI

Mr. A.K. Bajpai, for petitioner

Mr. Arun Sharma, Public Prosecutor

***

With the consent of parties, the matter is decided finally at this stage.

Instant petition has been filed assailing order dated 28th July, 2006 whereby learned trial

Judge rejected his application filed u/s.91 of the Code.

Petitioner is facing trial for offence u/ss.30, 32 & 33 of Rajasthan Forests Act read with Section 2 of Forests [Conservation] Act, 1980. It appears that after the matter was riped up for hearing, he came across certain documents, particularly, xerox copy of notification dated 10th March, 1973 and certain other certified copies which may show that land itself does not fall within reserve forest, but application filed by petitioner for taking such documents on record u/s.91 of the Code was rejected.

CMP 1513/06

It is true that documents are supposed to be filed during the course of trial and matter has been riped up for hearing ordinarily not to be interfered with, but in the facts of instant case, the petitioner is facing trial for offence under the Forest Act and certain documents which he has referred in the application filed u/s.91 of the Code, prima facie appear to be related to the area in question which may throw some light in respect of offence which as alleged has been committed by him.

This court, therefore, considers that photostat copy of notification and certain other documents of which he has made reference in the application u/s.91 of the Code may be necessary for adjudication of trial, therefore, considers appropriate to take these documents on record and consider the same. Relevant documents are reproduced as under: 10 1973 1. 1652.63 11-9-75, 20-10-76 29- 2. 12-76 (-) 3. 4. , 5. 2061 2064 6.

CMP 1513/06

Accordingly, the misc. petition stands partly allowed and the documents referred to supra in the application filed u/s.91 of the Code dated 26th May, 2006, be taken on record and trial Judge may proceed further with the matter in accordance with law. [AJAY RASTOGI],J.

FRBOHRA,JR.P.A.1513CMP2006 20-11.doc


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.