MOHIT SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A challenge has been made against the order passed by the court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hindaun City (Karauli) dtd. 20/4/2015, whereby learned revisional court has upheld the order passed by trial court, allowing the application preferred under Sec. 319 of Cr.P.C. for taking cognizance against both the petitioners for offence/s punishable under Ss. 323, 341/34 of IPC.

(2.) Taking support of judgment rendered in Gokul Chand and Another vs. State of Rajasthan and Others 2015 WLC (Raj.) UC 537, it has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is vital contradictions in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses as to at what place the alleged blow landed, independent witness has turned hostile and injuries are not medically supported, learned court below has erred in passing the impugned order by summoning the petitioners, while deciding the application preferred under Sec. 319 of Cr.P.C. since there was no occasion to pass summoning order against the petitioner because cogent evidence is lacking against the petitioners, so the order impugned, which has subsequently wrongly been confirmed by the revisional court, be quashed.

(3.) On the contrary, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel appearing for respondent no. 2, the complainant, has contended that both the accused persons were rightly named in the FIR and all the injured persons have meticulously named them in the incident, both the petitioners Mohit and Smt. Manju have taken active participation in the incident and have been named in the FIR as well and in the testimony of both the injured persons namely Haricharan and Asha, they have been attributed role in inflicting injuries as well as one of the eye witness Ms. Anita has also corroborated this aspect that both the petitioners have taken active part in the incident and have inflicted injuries, so the order impugned does not suffer from any perversity whatsoever and petition lacks merit, so be dismissed.