HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3863/2017 1. Surajmal S/o Manguram, R/o Village Maharoli, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District Sikar. 2. Manglram S/o Manguram, R/o Village Maharoli, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District Sikar. 3. Shanker Lal S/o Manguram, R/o Village Maharoli, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District Sikar. 4. Babulal S/o Manguram, R/o Village Maharoli, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District Sikar. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan Through P.P 2. Gigaram S/o Chainaram, R/o Village Maharoli, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District Sikar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore-PP Mr. Manjeet Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 12/03/2026 1. By way of filing the instant petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 06.06.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shrimadhopur, District Sikar by which the revision petition submitted by the complainant-respondent against the impugned order dated 17.10.2015 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.1, Shrimadhopur has been allowed and the matter has been remanded to the Trial Court for granting one (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3863/2017] opportunity to the complainant to lead his evidence at the cost of Rs. 3000/-. 2. Perusal of the record indicates that the complainant- respondent lodged an FIR No. 158/2014 with the Police Station Shrimadhopur, Sikar which has resulted in Final Report (Negative) against which the protest petition was submitted by the complainant-respondent but no evidence in support of the same was produced by him, hence the learned Magistrate vide order dated 17.10.2015 rejected the same. 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the complainant-respondent approached the Revisional Court by way of filing a revision petition and the Revisional Court passed the order impugned dated 06.06.2017 with the aforesaid directions. 4. This Court finds no error in the impugned order passed by the Revisonal Court. The order passed by the Revisional Court is just and proper, which does not warrant any interference of this Court, hence, the present petition is liable to be and the same is hereby rejected. 5. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed. 6. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to take up all the arguments/defence, which have been taken before this Court, at the appropriate stage of the matter. 7. Record of the Court below be sent back forthwith. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/32