[2025:RJ-JP:40861] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5497/2019 1. Mohd. Yusuf @ Tekda S/o Chand Ali, R/o Bada Sadat Mohalla, Malpura, Tonk. 2. Abdul Raseed @ Raseediya S/o Shri Mushtaq Ali, R/o Near Badi Masjid, Malpura, Tonk. ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anuj Rohila, Adv. Mr. Siddarth Sogani, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 08/10/2025 1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was filed by the petitioners against the order dated 09.08.2019 passed by Special Judge, Communal Riots Cases, Jaipur Metropolitan, whereby after declaring the witness PW11-Smt Manju as hostile, permission was granted to learned Public Prosecutor to re-examine the witness. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the order dated 09.08.2019 passed by the court below is causing miscarriage of justice to the accused petitioners, for the reason that when PW11-Smt Manju has given statement in favour of the accused petitioners, there was no occasion to declare the testimony of the witness as partly hostile and to grant opportunity to the learned Public Prosecutor to re-examine the witness. [2025:RJ-JP:40861] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-5497/2019] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition and submitted that the order dated 09.08.2019 passed by the court below is strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Indian Evidence Act, 1872 as also Criminal Procedure Code and such discretionary order passed by the court below cannot be put to challenge by way of filing the criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 4. Heard and considered. 5. The petitioners have utterly failed to point out any manifest or apparent illegality in the order dated 09.08.2019, which has been passed by the court below strictly in accordance with Sections 137, 138 and 154 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Such discretionary power exercised by the court below cannot be questioned in a routine manner by the accused petitioners. I do not find any illegality or error in the impugned order. 6. Hence, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed by the petitioners is dismissed. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J Jatin /49