SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Bhanwaru Khan vs Mubarik And Anr on 30 January, 2019

(1) S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 725/2011


State of Rajasthan

Connected With
(2) S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 724/2011
Bhanwaru Khan

Mubarik And Anr.


For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pradeep Choudhary in Appeal No.724/2011
None in Appeal No.725/2011
For Respondent(s) : Mr. O.P. Rathi, PP




1. None appears for the appellant Arif who, vide judgment

dated 21.07.2011 has been convicted for the offences punishable

under Section 498A and 304B IPC. For the former he has been

directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and for

the latter to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years.

2. As per report received from the jail Arif has undergone the

sentence and released from the Central Jail, Bikaner on


3. Thus, S.B. Criminal Appeal No.725/2011 filed by Arif is

disposed of as infructuous.

4. Bhanwaru Khan has filed the appeal challenging the same

decision which has been challenged by Arif and his grievance

relates to Mubarik, younger brother of Arif being acquitted.

(2 of 2) [CRLA-725/2011]

5. The charge-sheet filed shows that apart from Arif, husband

of the deceased and his younger brother Mubarik, no other family

member was named as an accused.

6. The father and relatives of the victim appeared as PW-1, PW-

2, PW-3 and PW-4.

7. After the evidence was led but before the judgment could be

pronounced Bhanwaru Khan filed an application under Section 319

Cr.P.C. pleading that in view of the testimony of PW-1, PW-2, PW-3

and PW-4 even the parents of Arif i.e. his father and mother

should face trial.

8. The said application was dismissed holding that the

testimony of the four witnesses does not implicate in any manner

the in-laws of the deceased.

9. Learned counsel for Bhanwaru Khan has taken me through

the testimony of PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4 and using language

in the plural they have tried to rope in Mubarik as well as his

parents i.e. in-laws of the deceased.

10. The impugned judgment disbelieves the witnesses qua

Mubarik being implicated. This is the reasoning to dismiss

Bhanwaru Khan’s application under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

11. Learned counsel for Bhanwaru Khan is unable to draw any

distinction between the alleged role stated by the four prosecution

witnesses qua Mubarik and his parents.

12. Under the circumstances the appeal filed by Bhanwaru Khan

i.e. S.B. Criminal Appeal No.724/2011 is dismissed.

45-Mohit Tak/-

Powered by TCPDF (

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation