MOHAN LAL SHARMA SON OF SHRI NATHU RAM SHARMA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/1846/2025 · 2025-08-25
Sudesh Bansal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12785 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12785 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:33554] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1846/2025 Mohan Lal Sharma Son Of Shri Nathu Ram Sharma, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of Village Jamwaramgarh Paldi Kala, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur Rural (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
2. Ramesh Chand Meena Son Of Chauthuram Meena, Aged About 49 Years, Resident Of Paldi Kalan, Jamwaramgarh, Jaipur Rural. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ghanshyam Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order 25/08/2025
1. Inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS 2023 has been invoked by petitioner, assailing the order of cognizance dated 22.10.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases (Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Jaipur District, Jaipur in Sessions Case No.157/2024, however, indisputably, charge arguments are yet to be commenced before the trial Court.
2. Counsel for petitioner states that prima facie there is no material in the charge-sheet to frame charges for alleged offences u/s. 323, 341 & 504 of IPC and Sections 3-1(r), 3-1(s) & 3-2 (va) of SC/ ST Act against petitioner.
[2025:RJ-JP:33554] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1846/2025] However, after arguing for sometime, counsel for petitioner seeks liberty to raise all his legal and valid objections during charge arguments.
3. In view of limited prayer of counsel for petitioner and without entering into merits/ demerits of the impugned order dated 22.10.2024, instant petition is disposed of with the liberty as prayed for.
4. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, stand
disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J Sachin/2