Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
Farjand Ali, J.
Mangi Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 410 of 2018
Decided On : 06-12-2022
Criminal Appeal - Cognizance of Offence - The court declined to take cognizance of the offence based on the report from the police under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and the lack of further evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed a complaint, and the court examined him under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The matter was sent to the police for inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. No further evidence was adduced.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no reason for interference in the order declining to take cognizance of the offence, as it was well reasoned and based on cogent grounds.
Issues: The issue was whether the court should take cognizance of the offence based on the report from the police under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and the lack of further evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the report from the police under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and the absence of additional evidence during the inquiry.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the order declining to take cognizance of the offence.
JUDGMENT
Farjand Ali, J. - By way of filing the instant criminal appeal, challenge has been made to the order dated 22.1.2018 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Hanumangarh in Complaint Case No.70/2017, whereby learned Court below has declined to take cognizance of the offence.
2. Bereft of elaborate details, the facts necessary for disposal of the case are that upon a complaint moved by the appellant, the Court below examined him under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and sent the matter under Section 202 Cr.P.C. to the police seeking assistance in inquiry. After receipt of the report from the police under Section 202 Cr.P.C., no other witness was examined in the inquiry and no further evidence has been adduced. The learned Court below has dealt with all the legal and factual aspects of the matter and passed the order impugned dated 22.1.2018.
3. I see no reason for interference in the order impugned, as the same is well reasoned and based on cogent grounds.
4. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
The court's decision on taking cognizance of the offence was based on the report from the police under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and the absence of further evidence.
The court upheld the rejection of the complaint based on the thorough investigation and valid grounds presented by the police, which led to the conclusion that the allegations were false.
The necessity for the trial court to apply a reasoned speaking order and show reasonable belief before putting the accused for trial under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act.
The court upheld the rejection of the complaint based on the negative final reports filed by the police and the absence of a prima facie case against the respondents.
The main legal point established is that the court will uphold the acceptance of a Final Report and rejection of a protest petition if no prima facie case is made out against the accused based on tho....
The court ruled that lack of supporting evidence from key witnesses and prolonged detention justified granting bail under the SC/ST Act.
At the stage of framing of charges, the court is not required to conduct a meticulous appreciation of evidence, and the impugned order must not suffer from any legal infirmity to warrant interference....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
