IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
SANDEEP MEHTA, J.
Ramzan Khan - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 269 of 2014
Decided On : 05-02-2018
Indian penal code – Section 363, 366, 376(2)(g), 120B, 143, 394, 302 – Criminal Procedure Code – Section 200, 202 – By way of this revision, petitioner Ramjan Khan has approached this Court for assailing order dated passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge in revision whereby revisional court set aside the order dated passed by learned Judicial Magistrate in F.R. Case taking cognizance against private respondents for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g) and Section 120B I.P.C – Held, learned revisional court took note of all these facts and came to a conclusion that allegations levelled by Smt. J in her statement recorded during proceedings of present protest petition were totally false and fabricated – She herself gave a sworn statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C., 1973 in proceedings of complaint filed in month of April 2009 arraigning complainant and his companions for various offences – Police collected clinching evidence pointing towards falsehood of complainants case and submitted negative Final Reports on two occasions in Court assigning detailed, cogent and convincing reasons – Revision is Dismissed
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. (!) (!)
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 with the intention of marrying her. The complainant launched a search and came to know that Rameshwar Vishnoi and Januram Jat were also involved in the conspiracy. Rameshwar harbored Yakar Khan for about 10 days and Januram provided the vehicle used for taking his wife away. A community conciliation was attempted on which Yakar Khan's parents and relatives assured that the complainant's wife would be returned safely in 5-10 days and sought a guarantee in return that no legal action should be taken. The complainant alleged that he came to know that the accused persons had forced Smt. J to execute Nikahnama with Yakar and that she had also been subjected to rape. Thereupon, he filed the complaint whereupon, an F.I.R. No. 39/2009 was registered at the P.S. Khajuwala for the offences under Sections 143, 366, 394 and 120B I.P.C. and investigation was commenced. After conducting investigation, the Police submitted a negative Final Report in the matter. The complainant was given a notice of the negative report. He filed a protest petition upon which, the trial court returned the matter to the Police for further investigation. The Police conducted further investigation and again filed a negative Final Report. Thereupon, the complainant submitted yet another protest petition and got himself, Smt. 'J', Santok Singh and Ameen Khan examined before the trial court under sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., 1973 The trial court proceeded to pass the order dated 11.11.2011 taking cognizance against the accused persons in the above terms. The accused challenged the order taking cognizance by filing a revision which came to be allowed by the order dated 16.11.2014 which is assailed in the instant revision filed by the complainant.
3. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel representing the parties and have gone through the material available on record.
4. It is relevant to mention here that during investigation, the Investigating Officer took on record a complaint which, Smt. 'J' portraying herself to be the wife of Jakir Khan (Yakar Khan) submitted in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate No.6, Jodhpur on 1.4.2009 against the petitioner herein, Najire Khan and two other persons alleging inter-alia that she was visting Kaylana lake Jodhpur with her husband Jakir on 31.3.2009. At about 4 O'clock, Ramjan Khan, Najire Khan and his companions came there and exhorted that she had maligned their family in the society. She and her husband Jakir were assaulted. Smt.'J' supported the allegations made in the complaint in her sworn statement recorded by the trial court under Section 200 Cr.P.C., 1973 on 2.4.2009. Jakir Hussain was murdered in the territorial jurisdiction of P.S. Chattargarh in the month of August 2009. A prosecution was launched against 7 persons,
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.