SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(RAJ) 6969

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
BADRI NARAYAN VYAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLR/126/2023



[2023/RJJD/004055]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JODHPUR.

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 126/2023

Badri Narayan Vyas S/o Bulakidas Vyas, Aged About 58 Years,

Working As Joint Legal Researcher, Near Lal Bai Bagechi Outside

Nathusar Gate, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. C.S.Kotwani.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGC.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

06/02/2023

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The present Criminal Revision Petition has been filed against

the order dated 18.01.2023 passed by Sessions Judge, Prevention

of Corruption Act Cases, Bikaner whereby the application filed by

the petitioner for providing him transcript of the conversation

between the petitioner and the complainant as also officials of the

department has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

is entitled to get the copy of transcript of the conversation

between the petitioner and complainant, therefore, the trial court

has wrongly rejected the application filed by the petitioner vide its

order dated 18.01.2023. He also submits that the CD provided by

the respondent department is not playable and therefore, the

conversation between the petitioner and complainant could not be

seen and heard by the petitioner. He, therefore, prays that the

[2023/RJJD/004055]

(2 of 2)

[CRLR-126/2023]

order dated 18.01.2023 passed by the learned trial court may be

set aside and the respondents may be directed to provide CD of

the conversation between the petitioner and the complainant.

Learned counsel for the State submits that there is no reason

that the respondent department will not provide a copy of the

transcript of conversation between the petitioner and the

complainant, if the same is available with the respondent

department.

In view of the submissions made at the bar, the revision

petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order dated

18.01.2023 passed by the Session Judge, Anti Corruption Act

Cases, Bikaner is quashed and set aside. The respondents are

directed to supply a working/ playable CD of the transcript of

conversation between the petitioner and the complainant in the

present case.

The stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

15-AnilSingh/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top