[2025:RJ-JD:998] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 762/2023 Devendra Sangwa S/o Ramniwas, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Lampolai Tehsil Merta Dist. Nagaur ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Jasoda Devi W/o Shri Bhabhoot Ram, R/o Village Lampoli, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur. 3. Prem Sukh S/o Shri Bhabhoot Ram, R/o Village Lampoli, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur. 4. Satrui W/o Shri Prem Sukh, R/o Village Lampoli, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur. 5. Supyari W/o Shri Laduram, R/o Village Lampoli, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur. 6. Meera Sangwa S/o Shri Laduram, R/o Village Lampoli, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP with Mr. Ramavtar Tada, for respondents No.2, 3, 5 & 6 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG Order 07/01/2025 The present revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 01.06.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Merta in Sessions Case no.04/2012, by which the learned Judge has dismissed the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JD:998] (2 of 3) [CRLR-762/2023] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who was complainant, filed an FIR against the accused persons and after investigation, the Police submitted charge-sheet against only two accused persons viz. Bhabhutram and Laduram and rest of the accused were left by the Police. It is further argued that names mentioned in the Police statement as well as in the Court statement, who are said to have committed the alleged crime, alongwith the accused Bhabhutram and Laduram but the learned trial Court while ignoring this material aspect of the case, has rejected the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner. Therefore, the order impugned may kindly be quashed and the application filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed. Per contra learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the accused-respondents submits that after thorough investigation the Police filed challan only against two accused persons viz. Bhabhutram and Laduram. The order impugned is perfectly justified and require no interference, therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be rejected. I have considered the arguments advanced before me and carefully gone through the material available on record. According to the FIR lodged by the petitioner, in which he named as many as eight accused persons Bhabhutram and Premsukh inflicted an axe blow on the head of his father and other accused assaulted with lathis and stones. It is also mentioned in the FIR that accused also snatched Rs.15,000/- from the pocket of his father and also broke the Mangalsutra of his mother. Likewise, the statement of the injured Ramniwas in which he also claims that two accused using sharp edged weapons but no injury of [2025:RJ-JD:998] (3 of 3) [CRLR-762/2023] sharp edged weapon was found in the injury report to support his claim and others hit him with lathis and stones. However, according to the Injury report, he received only four injuries and all the injuries were caused by blunt weapons. Additionally, two fractures were found and that too was on his non vital part of the body. Thus it is found that it is a case of over implication of as many as eight accused persons, as the injury report does not corroborate the severity of the assault as described in the FIR . So it seems unlikely that prosecution would secure a conviction against the accused persons, who were left out by the Police, as there is insufficient evidence to establish their involvement in crime. In these circumstances, there is no illegality and perversity in the order impugned passed by the learned trial Court while rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The revision thus being bereft of any force, is hereby dismissed. Stay application also stands dismissed. (MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J 117-Ishan/-