[2023:RJ-JP:31447]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 388/2023

1.

Girraj S/o Shri Jagannath, Resident Of Village Chahara,

Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan

2.

Jatiram S/o Shri Jagannath, Resident Of Village Chahara,

Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan

3.

Motiram S/o Shri Jagannath, Resident Of Village Chahara,

Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan

4.

Purshottam S/o Shri Girraj, Resident Of Village Chahara,

Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan

5.

Pukhraj S/o Shri Girraj, Resident Of Village Chahara,

Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan

6.

Lakhan S/o Shri Jatiram, Resident Of Village Chahara,

Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan

7.

Asharam S/o Shri Motiram, Resident Of Village Chahara,

Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan

----Appellants

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p

2.

Omprakash S/o Shri Lallulal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o

Near Railway Power House Ward No. 7, Gangapur City,

District Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan

----Respondents

For Appellant(s)

:

Mr. Manish Saini

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP

Mr. Neeraj Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

07/10/2023

Instant appeal is preferred aggrieve from order dated

03.09.2021 negating the FR in FIR No. 44/2019 registered at P.S.

[2023:RJ-JP:31447]

(2 of 6)

[CRLAS-388/2023]

Gangapur City, Sawaimadhopur for offence under Sections 323,

341, 452, 504 IPC and 3(1)(f), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

Learned counsel for appellants while relying upon the appeal

submitted that after a long delay, a complaint was filed before the

trial court and same was sent for registration of FIR under Section

156 (3) Cr.P.C. He also submitted a negative final report was

proposed by the police and on protest petition, learned trial court

has taken cognizance against the appellant. He submitted that

while taking cognizance learned trial court has failed to notice the

fact that complainant want to grab land of appellants without

making any payment and just to pressurize appellants, instant

case was registered. He also submitted that learned trial court

while disagreeing with reasoned closure report of police did not

assigned any reasons to negate the same. He also submitted that

the trial court has failed to notice that alleged incident did not

taken place in public place or place with public view. He also

submitted that it was well established from the record that there

was a serious land dispute between the parties and just to settle

said dispute this case was registered, which is an abuse of process

of law.

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public

Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant. Learned counsel

for complainant submitted that police has submitted negative final

report under the influence of appellants, and a protest petition

was filed by complainant and after recording evidence of five

witnesses, the trial court has proceeded to take cognizance. He

also submitted that the incident was corroborated by neighbours

[2023:RJ-JP:31447]

(3 of 6)

[CRLAS-388/2023]

of complainant and positive evidence was also led by complainant.

He also submitted that after cognizance, even the trial has begun

and also submitted copies of statement of PW-1to PW-4.

Heard learned counsels for the parties and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material on record.

On a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., FIR No.

44/2019 was registered on 30.01.2019 for incident of 26.12.2018

at P.S. Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur. After investigation

police has proposed negative final report on the ground that there

is land dispute between the parties as land of accused party was

in the possession of complainant and to settle the dispute accused

party had asked for money but complainant registered this case to

avoid payment.

After this negative final report, a protest petition