Anil Meena S/O Shir Shivram Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 May, 2022

Anil Meena S/O Shir Shivram Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 5

May, 2022

Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2815/2020

Anil Meena S/o Shir Shivram Meena, R/o Shiv Colony, Mahua,
Dist. Dausa, Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Dgp, Rajasthan Jaipur.
3. Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur, Metropolitan, Jaipur.
4. Acp, Jaipur East, Jaipur.
5. Sho, Ps Pratap Nagar, Dist. Jaipur East.
6. Io, In The Fir No. 750/2016, Reg. At Ps Pratap Nagar,
Dist. Jaipur East.
7. Victim A D/o Shri Jagram Meena, R/o Gram Post Ownd
Meena, Tehsil Mahuwa, District Dausa
----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumar Sahni, Adv.

Mr. Ram Mohan Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Fateh Ram Meena, PP Mr. Ashish Chauhan, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order ORDER RESERVED ON ::

29/04/2022 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON :: 05/05/2022 The instant criminal misc. petition has
been preferred by the accused petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to quash and set-aside
the order dated 10.10.2019 passed by the Special Court-Protection Of Children From Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 Court No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (for Short "learned trial Court").

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-2815/2020] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial Court
vide order dated 10.09.2019 wrongly allowed the protest petition filed by the respondent No.7 and
directed re-investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix had
attained majority. So, POCSO Court had no jurisdiction to try the case. Learned counsel for the
petitioner also submits that the learned trial Court wrongly directed the Investigating Authority to
conduct the potency test of the petitioner and wrongly gave the direction for FSL and DNA reports.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that after investigation, Investigating Officer had

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/122633693/ 1

 Anil Meena S/O Shir Shivram Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 May, 2022

not found the offence proved against the petitioner but the learned trial Court wrongly allowed the
protest petition filed by the respondent No.7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
the learned trial Court cannot order for re-investigation. So, order of the learned trial Court suffers
from infirmity and illegality. So, order of the learned trial Court be set-aside.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Bikarh Ranjan Rout Vs. State through the Secretary (Home), Government Of NCT of Delhi,
New Delhi reported in (2019) 5 SCC 542 and in Abhinandan Jha and others Vs. Dinesh Mishra and
another connected matter reported in (1967) 3 SCR 668.

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the learned trial Court
rightly allowed the protest petition filed by the respondent No.7 and after investigation, DNA report
has come (3 of 3) [CRLMP-2815/2020] against the petitioner. So, petition filed by the petitioner be
dismissed.

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the complainant and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned order.

It is an admitted position that the Investigating Officer had not found the offence proved against the
petitioner and submitted negative final report. After that, respondent No.7 had filed the protest
petition and learned trial Court after recording the evidence on the protest petition ordered for
further investigation. A bare perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned trial Court had
ordered to conduct potency test of the petitioner and to procure the FSL and DNA reports. As per
factual report, in which Investigating Officer had found the offence proved under Sections 376 and
506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act against the petitioner. So in my considered opinion, order
of the learned trial Court does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity. So, petition filed by the
petitioner, being devoid of merits, is liable to be dismissed.

Hence, this Criminal Petition stands dismissed. Stay application also stands disposed of.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Gourav/08 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/122633693/ 2