GYAN JYOTI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 457/2010 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class No. 4, Jodhpur for the offence under Sec. 3 of the Rajasthan Prevention of Defacement of Property Act.

(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in this case, the petitioner has been charge -sheeted without any basis whatsoever. He submits that there is no material on the record to link the petitioner with the advertisement board of the school namely, Le Cheryl International School which was allegedly appended without the permission of the Municipality, because there is no material on the record to show that the petitioner is the administrator of the School. He submits that the I.O. has filed charge -sheet showing the petitioner as administrator of the School whereas the petitioner is not the administrator of the School. He submits that there is no document available on the record to show that any advertisement board was actually affixed because no board has been seized by the I.O. in this case. He submits that though one Gena Ram has named Gyan Jyoti as the person who has put up the advertisement board but no details of the petitioner (father's name, address etc.) has been mentioned in the said statement. He, therefore, submits that the misc. petition be accepted as the proceedings going on against the petitioner before the Court below are absolutely malafide and amount to an abuse of process of Court.

(3.) AFTER considering the arguments advanced at the bar and upon going through the record of the case, it is evident that there is no evidence on the record to identify the petitioner as the person who appended the offending advertisement board. That apart, the offending advertisement board has not been seized by the I.O. in this case. More so, the board is said to be of the school named Le Cheryl International School but there is no such material on the record by which it can be inferred that the petitioner is the administrator of the School or is connected with it in any fashion. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the proceedings going on against the petitioner in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class No. 4, Jodhpur for the offence under Sec. 3 of the Rajasthan Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2006 are absolutely misconceived and deserve to be quashed.