RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Akil Kureshi, Sandeep Mehta, JJ.
Sawai Singh S/o Sh. Padamaram Mali - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
D. B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 505/2021
Decided On : 27-10-2021
Jurisdiction - Criminal Writ Petition - Rajasthan High Court Rules 1952, Rule 134 - The court interpreted Rule 134 to determine the maintainability of an intra-court appeal, concluding that the petition invoked criminal jurisdiction, thus rendering the appeal not maintainable.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner alleged fraud involving the creation of false sale deeds and sought to compel police to register an FIR and investigate. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, leading to this appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appeal was not maintainable under Rule 134 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, as the writ petition invoked criminal jurisdiction, which is not subject to intra-court appeal.
Issues: Whether the intra-court appeal was maintainable given that the writ petition was filed under criminal jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the nature of the writ petition, despite being filed under Article 226, invoked criminal jurisdiction, thus making the appeal not maintainable under Rule 134.
Result: The appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by the appellant-original petitioner to challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 27.07.2021 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 307/2021.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner had made a complaint before the police authorities alleging commission of acts, which according to the petitioner amounted to offences punishable under Section 193, 420, 467, 471 and 120B of IPC.
3. The allegations were made against the authorities of the Document Registration Office and certain private individuals, who according to the petitioner, were involved in fraudulent creation of sale deeds concerning his immovable property. Since the police authorities did not register the complaint and start investigation, the petitioner first moved the higher authorities and thereafter filed a writ petition. In the writ petition, the prayers of the petitioner were for a direction to the respondent authorities to register F.I.R. on the basis of information supplied by the petitioner in his complaint dated 19.04.2021 and to initiate enquiry and investigation and arrest the accused persons for the alleged offences under the India Penal Code as well as Section 81 of the Registration Act. The learned Single Judge dismissed the petition by the impugned judgment upon which this appeal has been filed.
4. At the outset, we had raised the question of maintainability of this intra-court appeal with reference to Rule 134 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules 1952 (hereinafter to be referred as the said Rules). Learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner painstakingly argued that the writ petition was filed under Article 226 and not under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and invoked writ jurisdiction of the High Court. The petition therefore must be seen as one invoking the civil jurisdiction of the learned Judge. In terms of Sub-rule (i) of Rule 134 of the said Rules, intra-court appeal was therefore maintainable.
5. Having considered the submissions of the counsel for the appellants, we do not find that this appeal can be entertained. Rule 134 of the said Rules reads as under:-
The memorandum of appeal shall be drawn-up in accordance with Rules 125, 130 and 131 of this Chapter and shall be accompanied by a certified copy of the judgment or order appealed from alongwith two extra typed copies of the judgment or order."
6. As per sub-rule (i) of Rule 134, an appeal would lie to the High Court from the judgment or the final order of one Judge of the High Court. However, such judgment should not be passed in exercise of appellate jurisdiction or in exercise of superintending powers of the High Court or revisional jurisdiction or in exercise of powers of criminal jurisdiction. Sub-rule (i) of Rule 134 thus, while providing for an intra-court appeal, also provides in which cases such appeal would not be maintaina
An intra-court appeal is not maintainable if the underlying writ petition invokes criminal jurisdiction, as per Rule 134 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules.
The nature of the proceeding and the relief sought determine the jurisdiction, and the maintainability of the appeal depends on the understanding of the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The maintainability of intra-court appeals concerning orders made in criminal jurisdiction under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is established as not permissible, emphasizing the nature of the proce....
Intra Court Appeals arising from orders passed in criminal jurisdiction by a Single Judge are not maintainable under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.
The exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the Writ Court in directing the registration of FIR renders the intra-court appeal not maintainable.
A writ appeal against an order declining to quash criminal proceedings is not maintainable when the order is based on the exercise of criminal jurisdiction.
An intra Court appeal would not lie against the order of a learned Single Judge in exercise of his powers under criminal jurisdiction.
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.