Advocates:
['PN MOHNANI', '', 'MISS YOGITA MOHNANI', 'MISS ANJU CHOUHAN', 'KAPIL MOHNANI', 'PP', '', 'ARUN KUMAR']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 812/2017

Ajit Singh @ Papsa S/o Achal Singh, By Caste Rajpurohit,

Resident Of Dhola Chautra, Police Station Kotwali, Pali.

----Petitioner

Versus

Smt. Lal Kanwar W/o Late Shri Madan Singh, By Caste Rajput,

Resident Of 429, Durga Colony, Pali, District Pali.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Ms. Yogita Mohanani

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Arun Kumar, P.P.

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Judgment

Reserved on 19/07/2022

Pronounced on 27/07/2022

1.

This Criminal Misc. Petition has been preferred under Section

482 Cr.P.C. praying for the following reliefs:-

“It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court will be

pleased to send for the records of the courts below, peruse the

same & after perusal set aside the orders of the cognizance taken

against the petitioner or pass any other orders that his Hon’ble

Court deems fir & proper.”

2.

This Criminal Misc. Petition has been preferred against the

order, dated 25.01.2017, passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST

(Prevention of Atrocities Act Cases), Pali, in Criminal Revision No.

89/2015 and against the order, dated 17.07.2012, passed by the

Addl. C.J.M. (Communal Riots), Pali taking cognizance under

Sectin 306 I.P.C. against the accused-petitioner in F.R. No.

(2 of 16)

[CRLMP-812/2017]

37/2011 in Criminal Case No. 283/2013, titled Smt. Lal Kanwar

Vs. Ajit Singh & Anr.

3.

Brief facts of the case as placed before this Court by the

learned counsel for the petitioner are that the respondent filed an

F.I.R. on 13.04.2011 at Police Station Kotwali, Pali stating therein

that the petitioner and his brother, Kiran Singh has falsely

implicted his son in a case, and threatened him and caused him

mental agony, and that due to the same, his son committed

suicide. And that, upon the receipt of such a complaint, the

concerned police authorities registered a case against the

petitioner for the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. and upon

investigation filed a negative Final Report.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that upon the

submission of the negative F.R. by the concerned police

authorities, the respondent filed a protest petition, which was

treated as a complaint by the concerned Magistrate and he

recorded the statement of the respondent under Section 200

Cr.P.C. along with complainant-witnesses C.W. 2 and C.W. 3

Vikram Singh and Pradeep, under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and took

cognizance against the petitioner herein for the offence under

Section 306 I.P.C.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the

concerned police authorities upon completion of investigation

found that the deceased, Narendra, son of the respondent herein,

and the respondent frequently quarreled, and that the lifestyle

and the character of the respondent was the reason for the suicide

of her son.

(3 of 16)

[CRLMP-812/2017]

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that

looking to the complaint so made out by the the respondent, the

ingredients of Section 306 I.P.C. against the petitioner are not

made out, and therefore there is no basis whatsoever for the

complaint to be taken against the petitioner.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this

Court to the Section 161 Cr.P.C. statements of witnesses, Ram

Singh and Rameshwarlal and the letter written by the wife of the

deceased, Narendra, which was addressed to the District Collector,

Pali; wherein the wife alleges that the suicide of the deceased,

was due to the deceased’s mother’s actions.

8.

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the

following judgments seeking quashing of an order taking

cognizance against accused person/s passed by a subordinate

Court;

8.1

Geo Varghese Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr. 2022

(1) SCJ 81 de