HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
(1) S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 725/2011
State of Rajasthan
(2) S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 724/2011
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
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
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.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)