Back
DINESH MEHTA
Raghuveer Singh Rajpurohit – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through Standing Counsel – Respondent
ORDER
1. An application has been filed by the petitioner, inter-alia, pointing out that while passing the order dated 22.07.2022, due to inadvertence, wrong case number (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition 2638/2022) has been mentioned, and the same ought to have been - S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.191/2022.
2. Mr. Shukla pointed out that notwithstanding above referred discrepancy, the petitioner had submitted his representation according to the intent of the Court, which the Investigating Officer has considered.
3. For the reasons stated and after hearing Mr. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, the application is allowed.
4. The order dated 22.07.2022, passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2638/2022 shall be deemed to have been passed in S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.191/2022.
5. Ordered accordingly.
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2638/2022
1. Instant petition preferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, calls in question the FIR No.74/2022, dated 12.03.2022, which has been registered against the petitioner in P.S. Boranada, District Jodhpur City for the offences under Sections 323 & 341 of Indian Penal Code.
2. Mr. Arvind Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the
The court has inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC to correct errors in orders and found the conclusions drawn by the Investigating Officer to be contrary to facts and law.
The court emphasized its inherent power to quash proceedings when allegations are inconsistent and appear intended to harass, providing a guideline for the application of Section 482 of the CrPC.
Reduced sentence in revisional jurisdiction when lower court awards excessive and disproportionate punishment in IPC 323 and 326 cases.
Delay in filing a complaint is critical and may indicate abuse of legal process if no prima facie case is established.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the continuance of an FIR and investigation can be considered an abuse of process of law, and the court has the power to quash such proceeding....
A criminal court cannot mechanically take cognizance of a final report for offences punishable with up to three years' imprisonment after the expiry of the three-year limitation period under Section ....
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
