SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Raj) 326

SANDEEP MEHTA
Ramzan Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Farzand Ali, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. R.K. Bohra, P.P. and Mr. Pradeep Choudhary, Advocates

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - Ramjan Khan challenged the revisional order setting aside cognizance taken by JMFC in F.R. Case No. 58/2009 for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g) and 120B IPC; revision dismissed. (!) - The revisional court concluded that the allegations in Smt. J’s protest petition were false and fabricated, supported by Smt. J’s own sworn statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C., and clinching police evidence; thus no error in the impugned order. (!) (!) - The High Court affirmed the dismissal of the revision, noting the negative final reports and the belated Section 202 Cr.P.C. statement by Smt. J were not dispositive to interfere with cognizance. (!) (!) - The matter involves examination of reliability of complainant’s allegations, independent corroboration, and the propriety of continuing cognizance in light of police reports and protest petitions. (!) - Final disposition: Revision dismissed as lacking merit; record to be returned. (!) (!)

What is the standard for taking cognizance in the present case under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g) and 120B IPC?

What is the Court's view on the credibility of the deposition of Smt. J and the effect on cognizance?

What is the outcome of the revision regarding the cognizance order and why?


JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Mehta, J.

1. By way of this revision, the petitioner Ramjan Khan (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') has approached this Court for assailing the order dated 16.1.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Bikaner in revision No. 159/2012 whereby the revisional court set aside the order dated 19.11.2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Khajuwala in F.R. Case No. 58/2009 taking cognizance against the private respondents for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g) and Section 120B I.P.C.

2. Facts in brief are that the petitioner herein lodged a written report at the P.S. Khajuwala on 21.3.2009 alleging inter-alia that Smt. 'J' d/o Manak Khan is his legally wedded wife. In the month of December, his wife eloped with one Yakar Khan who (Jakir), under the pressure of the community, left her back at the matrimonial home. However, while dropping off Smt. J, Yakar threatened that he would take her away again. Because of intervention of the community elders, no case was lodged by the complainant regarding this incident. On 13.3.2009 in the morning at about 4 O'clock, Yakar Khan again lured and took his wife away with him






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top