Advocates:
['NEEL KAMAL BOHRA', '', 'GOKULESH BOHRA', 'PP', 'HIMANSHU MAHESHWARI']

(1 of 8)

[CRLMP-2947/2018]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2947/2018

Sunil Bhati S/o Mala Ram, Aged About 45 Years, B/c Ghanchi,

R/o Prithvipura , Rasala Road, Jodhpur.

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan.

2.

Ashok S/o Bansi Lal, B/c Ganchi , Chanod Ki Haweli , Baiji

Ka Talab , Jodhpur

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Neel Kamal Bohra

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP

Mr. Himanshu Maheshwari

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Judgment

Reportable

18/08/2022

1.

This Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has

been preferred claiming the following prayer:-

“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the order passed

by the Additional Session Judge (Women Atrocities Court), Jodhpur in

Session Case No. 127/2013 order dated 13.08.2018 may be set aside

and the lower court may be directed that petitioner may be allowed

to test himself for the Narco Analysis Test and subsequently report of

that could be considered by the Hon’ble Court and in alternatively

any appropriate order which this Hon’ble Court fit just and proper in

the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in

favor of the petitioner.”

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition

has been preferred against the order dated 13.08.2018 passed by

learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases),

Jodhpur Metropolitan in Sessions Case No.127/2013, whereby the

learned trial court has rejected the application of the petitioner,

(2 of 8)

[CRLMP-2947/2018]

wherein he sought to submit himself to a Narco Analysis test and

bring the resultant report of the same onto the record as a part of

his defence. He further submits that the petitioner, who is husband

of the deceased-victim, is facing trial under Sections 304-B & 498-

A IPC.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of

this Court to the fact that after the examination of the prosecution

witnesses and defence witnesses, an application was preferred by

the petitioner to get himself examined for Narco Analysis test,

which is a recognized scientific technique, at the relevant stage of

Section 233 Cr.P.C.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that Section

233 Cr.P.C. would operate, as while entering into his own defence,

the petitioner is entitled to present any evidence, he may have in

support thereof.

5.

Section 233 Cr.P.C. reads as follows:

“233. Entering upon defence.

(1) Where the accused is not acquitted under section 232,

he shall be called upon to enter on his defence and adduce

any evidence he may have in support thereof.

(2) If the accused puts in any written statement, the Judge

shall file it with the record.

(3) If the accused applies for the issue of any process for

compelling the attendance of any witness or the production

of any document or thing, the Judge shall issue such

process unless he considers, for reasons to be recorded,

that such application should be refused on the ground that

it is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for

defeating the ends of justice.”

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that once

the stage of Section 232 Cr.P.C. is crossed and an acquittal is not

(3 of 8)

[CRLMP-2947/2018]

made in favour of the petitioner, an indefeasible right of the

petitioner emanates to to adduce any evidence in support of his

defence, and that the learned Court below has erred in denying

him the same, vide the impugned order.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the

judgment rendered by this Hon’ble Court in State of Rajasthan

Vs. Jasveersingh Jat reported in 2017(4) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 2079.

Relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder:

“6.

I have heard and appreciated the arguments

advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have

gone through the material available on record.

7.

The solitary objectio