Honble SAXENA, J. - This petition has been filed under Section 482 read with Section 407 (1) Cr.P.C. for recalling this courts order dated 19.9.94, which was corrected vide order dated 22.9.94 passed in S.B. Cr.Misc. Petition No. 584/94 "Rajeev Joshi vs. State", whereby the sessions case arising out of FIR No. 150/91, Police Station, Amba Mata, Udaipur, which was committed by the learned Addl.CJM, S.P.E. Cases, Jaipur, was withdrawn from the file of learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District and transferred to the file of learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur for trial in accordance with law.

(2). Petitioner is the real brother of deceased Smt. Manisha, who was married in February, 1985 to accused non-petitioner Rajeev Joshi & who died on the night intervening 8th and 9th Oct. 1991 due to extensive burn injuries inside the house of her husband situated in Udaipur. She was immediately taken to the hospital, where she is alleged to have made two dying declarations orally one to Dr. Miss Savita and other to a Magiestrate. The dying declaration said to have been made to the Meagistrate could not be completed because of her serious condition. Accused non- petitioner Rajeev Joshi reported the incident to the S.H.O., P.S., Amba Mata, Udaipur alleging that Smt. Manisha had committed suicide by sprinkling kerosene and torching her to fire. Subsequently Crime No! 150/91 Police Station, Amba Mata, Udaipur was registered on the report of petitioner for the offences u/ss. 498A and 304-B IPC, which was initially investigated by the Dy. S.P., Incharge of the Police Station. Thereafter, the investigation was transferred to the Addl. S.P., C.I.D. and S.P., C.I.D., Crime Branch. Ultimately, the petitioner filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7022/91 in the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur and vide order dated 12th Aug. 1992, the said writ petition was allowed and it was directed that investigation of the said case be transferred from the C.I.D., (C.B.) to the C.B.I., and that henceforth the C.B.I. shall investigate the case and proceed further in the matter. After completing investigation, the C.B.I. filed the challan in the court of learned A.C.J.M., S.P.E. Cases, Jaipur, who by his order dated 26.8.94 committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District for the offence u/s. 304 B IPC. On 8.9.94, accused Rajeev Joshi submitted a petition u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. read with Sec. 407 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 26.8.94 passed by the learned A.C.J.M., S.P.E. Cases, Jaipur, in this court at Jodhpur, which was allowed by order dated 19.9.94.

(2-A). I have heard Mr. D.S. Shishodia, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. K.L. Thakur, learned Public Prosecutor, Mr. M.L. Garg, learned counsel appearing for the accused non-petitioner No.2 Rajeev Joshi and Mr. Kamal Dave standing counsel for the C.B.I. at length and carefully perused the relevant record.

(3). Mr. Shishodia has strenuously canvassed that the accused non- petitioner No.2 did not implead the petitioner as a party in his S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 584/94 and suppressed material facts about the rejection of his bail applications u/ss. 438 and 439 Cr.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur District and the High Court Bench at Jaipur and the fact that on the writ petition filed by the petitioner in the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, the investigation of the case was entrusted to the C.B.I. and, as such, no opportunity of hearing was afforded to him, which has resulted in violation of the principles of natural justice. His another limb of the argument is that the State Government under Sec. 11 (1) (A) Cr.P.C. by its notification dated 22.8.78 has established a court of A.C.J.M., Jaipur District for conducting enquiry and trial in respect of the cases investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment having jurisdiction for whole of the Rajasthan and that under Sec. 14(3) of the Code, he did not commit any illegality in committing the case to th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document