JAI KISHAN KHANDELWAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE both these revision petitions arise out of common order dated 23.06.2012, therefore, they were heard together and are being decided by this common order.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the accused-petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State as well as Mr. Banwari Lal Agarwal, Complainant and father of the deceased Bharat Bhushan, who is present in person and perused impugned order dated 23.06.2012 and the relevant documents placed on record by the parties.

(3.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the complainant Banwari Lal Agarwal lodged an F.I.R. about an alleged incident, which took place in the night of 13th-14th December, 1996, wherein his son, Bharat Bhushan was found injured on the road in suspicious condition. The Complainant stated in his report that on 12.12.1996, his son Bharat Bhushan (deceased) came to Bharatpur from Mathura to participate in a marriage. On 13.12.1996, at around 1.00 PM, he was to proceed to Gwalior. At that time, one Lokesh son of Om Prakash(co-accused) came on the scooter to drop him at the bus stand. Accordingly, Bharat Bhushan(deceased) went with Lokesh. In the mid night of 13th-14th December, 1996 at around 1.00 AM, mother of Lokesh, Ms. Pawan and his brother came to the complainant 's house informing that Lokesh and Bharat Bhushan met with an accident near Chiksana. Bharat Bhushan was then taken to the hospital, where he died on 18.12.1996. The FIR was lodged showing it to be death under suspicious conditions and as an outcome of criminal conspiracy. The police registered FIR No.243/1996 at Police Station Chiksana. After investigation in FIR No.243/1996, charge sheet was filed for offence under sections 304-A and 279 IPC along with section 185 of Motor Vehicle Act against the accused Lokesh and Veerpal. Another FIR bearing No.636/1996 was lodged by the Police Station Mathura Gate, Bharatpur at the instance of present accused-petitioner Prashant Khandelwal S/o. Jai Kishan on 14.12.1996 at 9.30 AM, alleging theft of scooter bearing No. RJ 05 M 9698. After investigation therein, charge sheet was filed against Lokesh(co-accused, who is absconding in this case till now) for offence under section 379 IPC. Complainant Banwari Lal thereafter submitted a complaint on 27.03.1998 alleging therein inter alia that on 13.12.1996, while his son Bharat Bhushan was going to attend his college at Gwalior, accused Lokesh Thakur came to his house and told him that he would drop his son at the bus stand and thereafter both proceeded at about 1.00 A.M. Thereafter, at about 12.30 P.M. at night the brother and the mother of Lokesh namely Ms. Pawan came to his house and told him that Lokesh and Bharat Bhushan met with accident near Chiksana and also stated that upon hearing about the incident, he telephonically informed his friend Tej Singh and he rushed to the spot with Ms. Pawan and Tej Singh. On the arrival at the place of incident at about 2.30 A.M., he saw his son namely Bharat Bhushan lying injured on the road and the scooter was also lying there. Thereafter his son Bharat Bhushan passed away on 18.12.1996. It was stated by the Complainant Banwari Lal that an F.I.R. No. 636/1996 was registered for offence under Section 379 IPC on 14.121996 by Prashant Khandelwal stating therein that his scooter had been stolen from his house at about 1.00 A.M. It was further alleged in the complainant that the same scooter was used by the accused Lokesh on 13.12.1996. Thus, all accused persons allegedly entered into a criminal conspiracy and tried to give the incident a shape of accident after the murder of his son Bharat Bhushan and they also destroyed the evidence of the offence. It was also stated that an F.I.R. No. 243/1996 was registered by the Complainant at Police Station Chiksana, but the Investigating Officer acted in connivance wit the accused-persons and registered said FIR for offence under Section 304A IPC etc. Thereafter, learned Magistrate enquired the matter and recorded the statement of the Complainant Banwari Lal under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and got examined witnesses namely Tej Singh, Neeraj, Raj Kumar Agarwal, Vasudev Prasad, Sunil Kumar, Indra Bhushan, Shripal Singh and Dr. Ashok Mundada under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, learned Magistrate passed an order dated 19.04.2007 and took cognizance against the accused persons namely Lokesh, Prashant Khandelwal, Jai Kishan Khandelwal for offences under Sections 302, 120B IPC; Dhanesh Chand under Sections 120B and 201 IPC. The petitioners challenged order dated 19.04.2007 by way of a criminal revision petition and on rejection of the said criminal revision, a criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was also filed by the petitioners before this Court, which was also dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.01.2011. Thereafter, learned Trial Court heard the learned counsel for the parties on charge and passed the impugned order for framing charge against the accused-petitioners and other accused-persons. Co-accused Dhanesh Sharma also filed separate revision petition before this Court, which was decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.09.2012 and the impugned order was set aside qua the petitioner Dhanesh and the case was remanded to the Trial Court to re-hear the prosecution and the accused-petitioner for passing proper and reasoned order in the light of observations made in that matter. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 23.06.2012 passed by the Trial Court, these both revision petitions have been filed by the accused-petitioners.