Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
GANESH RAM MEENA
Jitendra Kumar Gothwal S/o Ghasilal Gothwal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. All these revision petitions arise out of the same order, hence, same are being decided together by this common order.
2. These criminal revision petitions have been preferred by the accused-petitioners under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. for quashing and setting aside the order dated 09.09.2022 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lalsot, District Dausa (for short, the ‘learned trial Court’) in Session Case No. 17/2022, State Vs. Shivshankar @ Balya & Ors., whereby the learned trial court dismissed the application filed by the accused petitioners under section 227 CrPC and charges were framed against them for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 384/149, 388/149, 306/149 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Rajasthan Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property)Act, 2008 (hereinafter is referred to as 'Act of 2008').
3. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of information furnished by Dr. Sunit Upadhyay, an F.I.R. No.157/2022 dated 29.03.2022 was registered at Police Station Lalsot, District Dausa for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 384 & 388 of IPC. It is a
Charges must be framed only after considering all evidence, including supplementary reports, to ensure fair trial rights of the accused.
The court affirmed that at the charge framing stage, only a prima facie case is required, emphasizing that meticulous examination of evidence is not necessary.
There is no legal bar against further investigation. Section 173(8) of Criminal Procedure Code does not restrict reopening of the case in which charge-sheet has already been submitted and cognizance ....
At the stage of considering an application for discharge, the court must proceed on the assumption that the material brought on record by the prosecution is true and evaluate the material to determin....
A trial court must apply its mind to the evidence and material before framing charges, ensuring reasonable grounds exist for presuming guilt.
The court established that at the charge framing stage, a strong suspicion of guilt suffices to proceed, without requiring proof of the allegations.
The court determined that at the discharge stage, only a prima facie case is considered, and sufficient evidence of grievous injury justified framing charges under attempted murder.
At the stage of framing of the charge, the accused has no right to produce any material, and the trial court has to apply its judicial mind to the facts of the case to determine whether a case has be....
Point of Law : Once charges have been framed, the issue of discharge becomes redundant, as Courts have no jurisdiction to allow discharge after charges having been framed.
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
