MANGI LAL, S/O SHRI PUKHRAJ, B/C LOHAR, R/O RANI STATION P.S. DESURI, DISTRICT PALI. (RAJ.) Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused-petitioner has preferred this misc. petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. to challenge impugned order dated 21.01.2014, passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Desuri, District Pali (for short, 'learned trial Court'), directing investigating agency to conduct reinvestigation/further investigation about thumb-impression and signatures of Binjaram on the disputed sale-deed allegedly executed by Binjaram. The sale-deed, in question, is of 17.11.1983.

(2.) Succinctly stated facts of the case are that there existed a dispute in respect of agricultural land of Khasra No.91 measuring 5 Bighas 9 Biswas between the accused-petitioner and the complainant who were staking their claim for ownership over the land in question. This sort of situation prompted respondent-complainant to lodge FIR against petitioner at Police Station Desuri, which was registered as FIR No.05/2006. After investigation, police submitted negative final report before the learned trial Court on 11.01.2006. Feeling disgruntled with the negative final report, respondent-complainant laid a protest petition and pursuant thereto examined himself as witness under Sec. 200 Crimial P.C. and during inquiry also produced witnesses under Sec. 202 Crimial P.C. Upon conclusion of the inquiry and examining prima facie materials available on record, learned trial Court rejected the protest petition entailing acceptance of negative final report. Being aggrieved by the same, respondent-complainant approached the revisional Court by preferring revision petition under Sec. 397 Crimial P.C. The learned revisional Court, after examining correctness, legality or propriety of the order passed by learned trial Court, did not find favour with the order of learned trial Court and consequently set aside the same and remanded the matter back with certain directions. The learned revisional Court issued necessary directions to the learned trial Court to solicit FSL report regarding thumb-impression and signatures of Binjaram on the original sale-deed dated 17.11.1983. After remand order, the learned trial Court sent the matter back to investigating agency for reinvestigation/further investigation in the matter in the light of observations made by learned revisional Court. The police, thereupon, solicited FSL report in the matter and after recording its satisfaction that there is no discrepancy in the thumb-impression of Binjaram on the disputed document, yet again submitted negative final report in the matter. The said negative final report was again scrutinised by the learned trial Court and while noticing certain infirmities in the same, recorded its indignation that FSL has not been carried out about the signatures of Binjaram on the disputed document and only the thumb-impression being subjected to FSL examination, proceeded to issue necessary directions to the investigating agency for conducting reinvestigation/further investigation in the matter. It is in that background, the petitioner has invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant, perused the impugned order and thoroughly scanned the entire record of the case.