KEWAL RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner against the judgment dated 11. 9. 1987 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar in Criminal Appeal No. 72/83 by which he dismissed the appeal of the accused petitioner and confirmed judgment and order dated 9. 6. 1983 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisinghnagar in Criminal Case No. 250/80 by which the learned ACJM convicted and sentenced the accused petitioner in the following manner:- Name of accused petitioner Convicted u/sec. Sentence awarded Kewal Ram 419 IPc Two years Ri 468 IPc Two years Six months RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 10 days SI. 471/467 IPc Two years RI and to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 10 days SI. All the above substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. By the same judgment, the learned ACJM acquitted accused Mst. Gaura and Gangaram for the offence under sections 419, 467, 468 read with 120-B IPC.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this revision, in short, are as follows:- On 24. 4. 1975, one Mst. Gangi filed a complaint before the Court of Magistrate, Raisinghnagar and the same was sent under section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. to the Police Station Raisinghnagar for investigation. On that complaint, a case was registered in that Police Station and the allegation in the said complaint was for the offence under section 376 IPC against one Dula Ram. During investigation, police came to the conclusion that Mst. Gangi was not widow of Sonu Ram, but was wife of Uttamram and Sonu Ram was allotted land in Chak 73 N. P. One Ganga Ram said that Sonu Ram had no legal heir and got that land cancelled and he got that land allotted in his name. Later on, allotment of that land was again cancelled and land became that of the State. THE allegation was that accused petitioner Kewal Ram submitted an application alongwith affidavit before the allotting authority stating that he was legal heir of Sonu Ram and, therefore, land may be allotted in his name and not only that, he entered into an agreement to sell with Krishna for the transfer of that land. After usual investigation, police filed challan against the accused petitioner Kewal Ram, Smt. Gaura and Ganga Ram for the offence under Sections 420, 468, 467, 471 and 120 IPC in the Court. On 18. 9. 1978, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Raisinghnagar framed charges for the offence under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471 IPC against the accused petitioner and for the offence under sections 419, 467, 468/120 IPC against the accused Mst. Gaura and Gangaram. THEreafter, the case was put up for recording evidence of the prosecution witnesses. On 20. 8. 1980, no evidence was produced by the prosecution and, therefore, it was ordered by the Court that in case on the next date, the evidence was not produced by the prosecution, its evidence would be closed and the case was fixed for recording prosecution evidence on 8. 10. 1980 and on 8. 10. 1980, the Court ordered that witness Ganga had died and therefore, his evidence was closed and rest witnesses Paridevi and Mangli were summoned and the case was fixed for 6. 11. 1980. On 6. 11. 1980, evidence of Paridevi and Mangli was closed and rest witnesses were summoned for 19. 12. 1980 and 20. 12. 1980. On 19. 12. 1980 and 20. 12. 1980, witnesses were not produced by the prosecution and the case was fixed for 3. 3. 1981. In the order-sheet dated 3. 3. 1981, it was written that since the file was huge one, therefore, after perusing it, order for closing evidence of the prosecution witnesses would be passed and similar order-sheet was written on 23. 3. 1981 and the case was fixed for 14. 4. 1981. From the order- sheet dated 14. 4. 1981, it appears that the case was fixed for recording statements of the accused persons under Section 313 Cr. P. C. on 21. 4. 1981. On 21. 4. 1981, the case was fixed for 25. 4. 1981. On 25. 4. 1981, the statements of the accused persons under section 313 Cr. P. C. were recorded. Denial and admission of the documents were also done and looking to the admission and denial, it was ordered to the APP to furnish the list of those witnesses, he wanted to produce upto 27. 4. 1981. THEreafter, statements of the prosecution witnesses were recorded and after recording fresh statements of the accused persons under section 313 Cr. P. C. , the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisinghnagar through his judgment and order dated 9. 6. 1983 acquitted the accused Mst. Gaura and Gangaram of the charges framed against them, but convicted the present accused petitioner for the offence under sections 419, 468, 471/467 IPC and sentenced in the manner as indicated above holding inter-alia that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt only against the accused petitioner for the said offences. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 9. 6. 1983 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisinghnagar, the accused petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar. THE learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar also dismissed the appeal of the accused petitioner through his judgment dated 11. 9. 1987. Aggrieved from the said judgment dated 11. 9. 1987 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar, this revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner.

(3.) THE question that arises for consideration is whether the above procedure adopted by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate can be said to be without jurisdiction and illegal or not.