PANCHU LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMITTEDLY the petitioner was not an accused before the learned trial court. While disposing of Criminal Case No. 434/1987, the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate, Tonk, vide his order dated 9.4.1996, convicted and sentenced Rajaram and Lallu Ram under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas Manohar Lal and Ram Pyari were acquitted. By the said order the learned trial Court took cognizance against the petitioner under Section 447 of the I.P.C.

(2.) THE petitioner preferred revision against the said order but the learned Special Judge (Communal Riots Cases) Additional Sessions Judge, Tonk, vide his order dated August 23, 1997, dismissed the revision. Against the findings of the court below the petitioner Panchu Lal has filed this Criminal Misc. Petition, invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. of this Court.

(3.) A cursory look of the above Section demonstrates that cognizance against the petitioner could have been taken only during the trial of the case as is evident from the words could be tried together with the accused. But in this case when the trial of the case is over, no cognizance could be taken against the petitioner who was not an accused. Therefore, both the Courts below have not properly appreciated the provisions contained in Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. and thus committed illegality in taking cognizance against the petitioner.