SMT. RAJESH BAI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the strength of an undated affidavit of the petitioner Rajesh Bai presented along with this petition, which is said to have been sworn on 23.9.1997, it was tried to be argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that her earlier statement dated 28.6.1997 recorded by the learned Magistrate was given under threat.

(2.) An application was presented before the learned trial Court by the petitioner Rajesh Bai to once again record her statement under Sec. 164, Cr.RC. which was rejected by the learned Magistrate by his order dated 11.8.1997. From the order, it appears that the investigation was almost complete. I have also perused the earlier statement dated 28.6.1997 made by the petitioner Rajesh Bai under Sec. 164, Cr.RC. before the learned Magistrate. The submission made by the learned counsel Shri Balwada was that only her signature was obtained below that statement and the endorsement made by the learned Magistrate below the statement stating that the statement was read over and explained to her and thereafter only it was signed, by her. That apart, the reasons assigned by the learned trial Magistrate in his impugned order dated 11.8.1997 rejecting her application cannot be said to be unreasonable. In fact, the learned Magistrate has assigned cogent reasons for dismissing the application filed by the petitioner to record her subsequent second statement under Sec. 164, Cr.RC.' It appears from both the statements that the petitioner can play in the hands of any one and can file affidavit as desired by any one. Under the circumstances, it is difficult for this Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Sec. 482, Cr.PC. in cases where the learned Magistrate has properly exercised his power.

(3.) In view of the above discussion, this petition fails and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.