SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jasveer Singh vs State & Anr on 29 November, 2017

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 31 / 2015
Jasveer Singh S/o Banta Singh, by caste Kumhar Sikh, R/o
Bhakharwali, Tehsil Sangeria, District Hanumangarh
1. The State of Rajasthan
2. Nakchhatra Singh S/o Sohan Singh, by caste Kumhar Sikh, R/o
Fatehgarh Purushottam Bas, Tehsil and District Hanumangarh
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Panwar, P.P.
Mr. J.S. Khichi

By way of this petition under Section 482 CrPC, the

petitioner seeks to assail the order dated 25.06.2012 passed by

learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh in Case

No.137/2012, whereby cognizance was taken against the

petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC and

also the order dated 09.12.2014 passed by learned Additional

Sessions Judge No.2, Hanumangarh, whereby the said order of

cognizance was affirmed in revision.

I have heard and considered the arguments advanced

by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the

documents filed by the police under Section 173 CrPC. The police

after thorough investigation of the case submitted a negative final
(2 of 2)

report finding the complainant’s admitted allegations gave rise to

a dispute of purely civil nature. Learned Magistrate rejected the

final report and took cognizance against the accused petitioner in

the above terms.

Ex facie, I am satisfied with the argument advanced by

learned counsel Mr. Gupta that the admitted allegations of the

complainant do not disclose necessary ingredients of the offence

under Section 406 IPC because the material allegation of

entrustment is totally lacking from the complainant’s evidence.

Furthermore, the complainant himself executed and furnished an

affidavit dated 12.11.2006 to the Investigating Officer verifying

that he had lodged the case owing to misunderstanding and did

not desire any action against the petitioner whatsoever.

In this view of the matter, I am of the firm opinion that

the trial of the accused petitioner Jasveer Singh as well as co-

accused Baldev Singh for the offence under Section 406 IPC is

totally unwarranted and rather amounts to gross abuse of the

process of court. Consequently, the instant misc. petition is

allowed. The impugned order dated 25.06.2012, whereby

cognizance was taken by the trial court for the offence under

Section 406 and all further proceedings of criminal case

No.137/2012 pending against the accused petitioner Jasveer

Singh and the co-accused Baldev Singh are hereby quashed.



Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2022 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