HIMMAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have preferred this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 against the order dated 10.08.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner in criminal revision No. 84/2005 and for quashing of the proceedings initiated in its pursuance pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bikaner in FR No. 111/99 (arising out of FIR Case No. 182/99 of P.S. Sadar, Bikaner for the offence under Sections 304-A and 201 of IPC.

(2.) The respondent No. 2 filed a complaint in which FIR No. 182/99 was registered at P.S. Sadar, Bikaner for the offence under Sections 304-A and 201 IPC. The allegation was that the respondent's son Hitendra Kumar was employed in Hotel Laxmi Niwas which was owned by Mahendra Singh and on 10.02.1999 during construction work while a truck was unloaded in the hotel premises as per the instructions of the owner Narendra Singh and contractor, the petitioner's son was engaged in the same, marble slab fell on the petitioner's son and other labourer, as a result of which, three labourers namely Mohd. Ali, Sarafat Ali and Ayub received injuries and the complainant's son died on the spot.

(3.) The negative final report was filed by the police and on re-investigation also, a negative final report was filed. The orders accepting the negative final report was challenged by revision whereby learned revisionary court remanded the matter back. Three witnesses were examined and learned trial court vide order dated 18.05.2004 again accepted negative final report by a detailed order. Again revision was filed and on 10.08.2007, the revision petition was allowed and complaint was remanded back to the trial court to pass orders afresh. The revisionary court kept the hearing on 24.08.2007 but being aggrieved by the order dated 10.08.2007 passed by the learned revisionary court and the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bikaner numbered as FR Case No. 111/99.