IMAMUDDIN S/O SHRI WALI MOHAMMAD B/C MUSALMAN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/2217/2019 · 2026-03-09
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2019
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2019 DAILYLAW 3157 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2019 DAILYLAW 3157 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2217/2019 Imamuddin S/o Shri Wali Mohammad, R/o Plot No.7, Ghati Karolan, Police Station Kho Nagoriyan, District Jaipur, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, Through PP. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 09/03/2026
1. By way of filing the instant petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 07.03.2019, passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No. 12, Jaipur Metropolitan, in Criminal Case No. 2598/2013, by which the application submitted by the accused-petitioner under Section 91 Cr.P.C. for summoning certain documents regarding disputed property from the Higher Police Officials, has been rejected.
2. Perusal of the file indicates that charge-sheet has been submitted against the accused-petitioner for the offence under Sections 147, 149, 186, 189, 323 and 353 IPC and the cognizance for the above stated offences has been taken by the trial Court. Prior to the stage of framing of charge, an application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. has been submitted by the petitioner before the Trial Court for summoning certain documents regarding disputed property which are in possession of the Higher Police Officials. The
(2 of 2) [CRLMP-2217/2019] aforesaid application has been rejected by the Court below not on merits but on a technical count that the matter is still at the stage of framing of charge and that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. at appropriate stage of his defence evidence. Hence, treating the aforesaid application as pre-mature, the same has been rejected by the Court below.
3. This Court finds no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Court below, which warrants any interference of this Court.
4. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move appropriate application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. at the appropriate stage before the Trial Court. In case, such application is submitted by the petitioner before the Trial Court, it is expected from the Trial Court to decide the same strictly in accordance with law.
5. Accordingly, the present misc. petition stands dismissed. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/1