1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
*********

S. B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO…………………. /2023

MEHMOODA SON OF REHMAT KHAN MEV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE

KAITHWARA POLICE STATION KAITHWARA, DISTRICT BHARATPUR,

RAJASTHAN

.....COMPLAINANT/ PETITIONER
VERSUS

STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH P.P.

…..NON-PETITIONER

**********
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION UNDER SECTION

482 CR.P.C. FOR QUASHING AND SET ASIDE ORDER

DATED 15.11.2022 PASSED BY SHRI VIJAY SINGH

MAHAWAR, (D J CADRE) ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND

SESSIONS JUDGE, KAMAN, DISTRICT BHARATPUR

WHEREBY HE DISMIISED THE REVISION PETITION

FILED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2022

PASSES BY……. CIVIL JUDGE CUM JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE KAMA WHEREIN HE DISMISSD THE

APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 190(1) BY THE

COMPLAIANT IN FIR NO.- 251/2020 WHICH WAS

REGISTERED AT POLICE STATION KAITHWARA FOR

THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 143, 323, 341 AND

307 OF THE IPC.

TO,
THE HON’BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS

OTHER COMPANION JUDGES OF THE RAJASTHAN

HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS;

 2

The humble petitioner respectfully begs to submit as under:-

1. That brief facts of the case are that on 10.12.2020 an FIR No.
251/2020 was registered at police station Kaithwara District
Bharatpur for the offence under section 143, 323, 341 and
307 IPC. That in case after due investigation investigating
officer presented/submitted the charge sheet against the
accused under section 323, 341, 324, 325 and 34 of the IPC.
In this case role of the police officer is highly questionable as
he removed the offence under section 307 of IPC against the
accused. It is pertinent to mention herein that police officer
presented the defaulted/concocted Charge sheet with mala
fide intention and without perusing the documentary and
medical reports made available during the investigation.

2. That being aggrieved by the inaction of the police officer

complainant filed an application before the learned Magistrate
under section 190(1) of the Cr.P.C. stating therein that police
officer malafidly remove the name of other 03 co-accused
during the investigation and charge-sheet was filed against
Kalwant and Mansingh under bailable offences and remove
the grievous charge of the section 307 IPC against the
accused and the said application filed before the learned
Magistrate was dismissed vide order dated 31.03.2022 and
aggrieved with order dated 31.03.2022 a revision petition was
preferred before the Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Kaman but same was dismissed vide order dated 15.11.2022.
Certified copies of order dated 31.03.2022 and 15.11.2022
are being filed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-1 & 2
respectively.

3. That in this case role of police agency is highly mala fide as

while investigation investigating officer did not perused all
the relevant medical reports and just on the basis of faulty
investigation charge sheet was presented under the bailable
offences and removed offence under section 307 from the
charge sheet. It is often noticed by the courts dealing with the
 3

criminal cases that the investigating officers commit many

mistakes and latches in the investigation of crimes leads to
faulty trial.

4. That Justice in criminal cases depends upon fairness of

investigation and any lapses in investigating the criminal
matter will vitiate the complete trial. Investigation of criminal
cases must, therefore, be done very carefully and trials must
be conducted with a sense of responsibility.

5. That Non-professionalism & perfunctory approach towards

investigation and any Serious defects on part of investigating
agency affecting fair investigation and fair trial amounts to
violation of fundamental rights of accused under Articles 20 &
21 and it is pertinent to mention herein that in the present
case police agency did not conduct the investigation in fair
manner and nor perused the X-ray report which clearly
suggest seriousness of the injuries caused.

6. That Where there has been negligence on the part of the

investigating agency or omissions, etc, which resulted in
defective investigation, there is a legal obligation on the part
of the court to examine the prosecution evidence dehors such
lapses carefully to find out whether the said evidence is
reliable or not but in the present case learned court below
passed the order in mechanical manner without applying
proper judicial mind and when police agency failed to
considered the material evidence such as X-ray report and
removed charges of 307 against the accused then it was the
duty of the learned court below to examine all such material
evidences placed before it while passing such casual order.

7. any impact unless miscarriage of justice is brought about or

serious prejudice is caused to the accused.
 4

Feeling aggrieved from the impugned orders dated

15.11.2022 and 31.03.2022, the petitioner submits this
criminal misc. petitioner under section 482 CrPC before
this Hon’ble Court on the following grounds:-

a) That the impugned order dated 31.03.2022 passes by

the revisional court is not sustainable in the eye of
law being contrary to the facts and law and the same
has been passed against the material available on
record.

b) That there are medical reports available which

suggest seriousness of the injuries and That offence
as alleged is made out against the accused from the
evidence produced before the learned court below and
learned court below did not applied the judicial mind
in casual manner, so the order so passed is liable to
be set aside.

c) That the not continuation of further proceedings

against the accused person in appropriate sections
would vitiate the trial and trial will become just a
formality and impugned orders are liable to be
quashed and set aside.

That the petitioner craves the indulgence from this

Hon’ble Court to raise other submissions and grounds at the
time of the hearing of the case.
PRAYER

It is therefore humbly prayed that Your

Lordships may graciously be pleased to accept this criminal
misc. petition and further be pleased to call for the entire
record relating to the case from the investigating officer and
same may kindly be examined and:
 5

i) Order dated 15.11.2022 and 31.03.2022 may kindly be

quashed and set aside
ii) Any other appropriate relief may also be granted to the
petitioner.
The Humble Petitioner
Through counsels

(KAPIL )
Advocates
Notes: -
1. No such petition has been filed by the petitioner earlier
before this Hon'ble court or any other court.
2. Copy of this misc. petition has already been given to the
learned P.P.
3. It has been typed by my private steno who is not staff
member of this Hon’ble High Court on stout papers as pie
papers are not readily available.
4. Matter pertains to Jaipur jurisdiction.

Counsel for the petitioner

 6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
*********

S. B. CRIMINAL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO……...../2023

IN
S.B.CRIMINAL MISC.PETITION NO…………/2023

MEHMOODA SON OF REHMAT KHAN MEV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE

KAITHWARA POLICE STATION KAITHWARA, DISTRICT BHARATPUR,
RAJASTHAN.

.....COMPLAINANT/ PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH P.P.

…..NON-PETITIONER

*********
S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. STAY APPLICATION UNDER

SECTION 482 CR.P.C

TO,
THE HON’BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS

OTHER COMPANION JUDGES OF THE RAJASTHAN

HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS,

The humble applicant respectfully begs to submit as under:-

1. That the petitioner has this day filed a criminal misc.

petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Hon’ble court
in which they have all hope of success.

2. That the petitioner has submitted detailed facts and grounds

in the memo of the Criminal Misc. Petition. To avoid
 7

repetition of the same the petitioner craves leave of this

Hon’ble court that these may also be considered in this stay
application and on the basis of which it is apparent that
further proceedings in impugned FIR are abuse of the
process of court.

3. That in the facts, circumstances and grounds narrated in

the memo of Criminal Misc. Petition, the petitioner has got
very good prima facie case in his favour and as such he is
entitled to get the interim relief from this Hon’ble Court.

It is, therefore humbly prayed that the stay

application of the petitioner may kindly be accepted and
during pendency of this Criminal Misc. Petition further
operation of order dated 15.11.2022 and 31.03.2022 may
kindly be stayed.

The Humble Petitioner

Through counsel

(KAPIL)
Advocates

Notes: -

1) No such stay petition has been filed by the petitioner earlier

before this Hon'ble court or any other court.

2) Copy of this application shall be filed immediately after

admission.

3) It has been typed by my private steno who is not staff

member of this Hon’ble High Court on stout papers as pie
papers are not readily available.

Counsel for the petitioner

 8

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
*********
S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.………./2023

MEHMOODA VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN

SYNOPSIS

 Brief facts of the case are that on 10.12.2020 an FIR No.

251/2020 was registered at police station Kaithwara District
Bharatpur for the offence under section 143, 323, 341 and
307 IPC. That in case after due investigation investigating
officer presented/submitted the charge sheet against the
accused under section 323, 341, 324, 325 and 34 of the IPC.
In this case role of the police officer is highly questionable as
he removed the offence under section 307 of IPC against the
accused. It is pertinent to mention herein that police officer
presented the defaulted/concocted Charge sheet with mala
fide intention and without perusing the documentary and
medical reports made available during the investigation.

 That being aggrieved by the inaction of the police officer

complainant filed an application before the learned
Magistrate under section 190(1) of the Cr.P.C. stating
therein that police officer malafidly remove the name of other
03 co-accused during the investigation and charge-sheet
was filed against Kalwant and Mansingh under bailable
offences and remove the grievous charge of the section 307
IPC against the accused and the said application filed before
the learned Magistrate was dismissed vide order dated
31.03.2022 and aggrieved with order dated 31.03.2022 a
revision petition was preferred before the Additional District
and Sessions Judge, Kaman but same was dismissed vide
order dated 15.11.2022.

Counsel for the petitioner

 9

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
*********
S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.………./2023

MEHMOODA VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN

INDEX

S.NO. PARTICULAR PAGE NO.

1. MEMO OF THE MISC. PETITION 1 TO

2. MEMO OF STAY APPLICATION TO

DOCUMENTS:-

ANNEX.1: CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER DATED 31.03.2022 TO

ANNEX.2. CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER DATED 15.11.2022 TO

______________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER