Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI
Virendra Singh @ Ravi S/o Sh. Vijay Singh Ji – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Home – Respondent
ORDER :
Farjand Ali, J.
1. The proceedings under Section 110 of Cr.P.C. got initiated against the petitioner which grieved him and thus, the instant misc. Petition.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the niceties of the matter as well as legality of provisions of Section 110 of Cr.P.C.
3. As a matter of act, in none of the case, the petitioner has been convicted and as such, he cannot be termed as a “Habitual Offender”. The issue involved in this petition has elaborately been discussed in the case of Sita Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1936/2012 passed by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court on 06.08.2013 which is being reproduced hereinbelow:-
“Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The instant misc. petition has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated 19.5.2012 passed by the learned S.D.O., Merta City whereby the petitioner was issued a bailable warrant for showing cause as to why he should not be bound down for a period of one year under the provisions of Section 110 Cr.P.C. and for quashing of the proceedings of the Complaint Case No.85/2012 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.O., Mer
A person cannot be classified as a habitual offender under Section 110 Cr.P.C. without substantial evidence of repeated convictions for different offences.
Executive Magistrate cannot pass any order, once there is anything to say that prima facie, any person in possession and once there is a civil matter pending.
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
