MAHIPAL SINGH SIHAG SON OF SHRI RAMJAS SIHAG v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/89/2025 · 2025-01-09
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2198 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2198 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:1306] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 89/2025 Mahipal Singh Sihag Son Of Shri Ramjas Sihag, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of R-8, Rajasthan University Campus, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
2. Sagarmal, Son Of Ghisalal, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of Village Tatiawas, Police Station Chomu, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Dr.Savita Sihag For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vivek Choudhary, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 09/01/2025
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 18.07.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Chomu, District Jaipur in Criminal Case No.348/2022, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing of this misc. petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. By passing the order impugned, the learned Magistrate had framed charges against the petitioner for the offence under Section 447 and 427 I.P.C.
2. In the considered opinion of this Court, the revision petition against such order passed by the learned Magistrate lies before the Court of Sessions, but instead of filing the same before the Court of Sessions and by-passing its jurisdiction, the petitioner
[2025:RJ-JP:1306] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-89/2025] has straightaway approached this Court by way of filing of this petition.
3. In view of the above, the instant petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to submit revision petition under Section 438 of B.N.S.S. before the Court of Sessions.
4. In case, such petition is submitted under Section 438 of B.N.S.S. in case, any revision petition is submitted before the Court of Sessions within a period of one month from today, it is expected from the Revisional Court to hear and decide the same on its merits, after affording due opportunity of hearing to both the sides, ignoring the period of limitation.
5. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /23