JHARIA S O MANIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution is clearly not maintainable and must be dismissed but in view of the growing trend of filing such frivolous applications, we deem it necessary to state the reasons therefor.

(2.) It appears that the petitioner along with two others was arraigned before the Sessions Judge of Alwar in Sessions Trial No. 120 of 1976 for having committed an alleged offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, alternatively, under S. 302 read with S. 34 of the Code. By his finding and sentence dated April 21, 1977 the learned Sessions Judge convicted the petitioner and his two associates for having committed the murder of the deceased Jharia in furtherance of their common intention under Section 302 read with Section 34, and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life, while recording their acquittal under S. 302. On appeal, a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) in Criminal Appeal No. 219 of 1977 by judgment dated July 3, 1980. maintained the conviction of the petitioner under S. 302 read with Section 34 but acquitted his two associates giving them the benefit of doubt. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the High Court, the petitioner applied to this Court for grant of special leave under Art. 136 of the Constitution. The special leave petition was dismissed by this Court on February 23, 1981. An application for review was also dismissed on November 1-9-1981. Thereafter, the petitioner filed this petition under Article 32 assailing his conviction and sentence. The petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ directing the State of Rajasthan to forbear from giving effect to the judgment and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge as also the judgment of the High Court as well as the order passed by this 'Court dismissing the special leave petition. He further seeks a declaration that his conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 by the High Court was illegal and therefore his detention in jail was without the authority of law and in violation of Art. 21 read with Arts. 14 and 19 of the Constitution.

(3.) The petitioner contends that in view of the decisions of this Court reported in (1964) 1 SCR 678 - Krishna Govind Patil v. State of Maharashtra; (1976) 3 SCR 651 - Maina Singh v. State of Rajasthan and (1980) 2 SCC 401 - Fiara Singh v. State of Punjab, his conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 was illegal as he had been charged with two other named persons who have been acquitted by the High Court and therefore he cannot be convicted of an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34. Upon this basis, the contention is that the petitioner has been deprived of his life and liberty without the authority of law in violation of Art. 21 read with Arts. 14 and 19 of the Constitution. It is represented to us that the contention based upon the decisions of this Court had been advanced during the course at the hearing of the special leave petition, but both the special leave petition and the application for review have been dismissed and therefore the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this Court for appropriate writ, direction or order under Art. 32 of the Constitution.