[2025:RJ-JP:40651] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2490/2019 Sunil Kumar S/o Puran Mal, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Mannas, Police Station And Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through PP 2. Saroj Devi D/o Prahlad, R/o Hemant Pura, Bhatiwar, District Jhunjhunu. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. O.P. Jhajhria For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 07/10/2025 1. This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner against order dated 09.01.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu (Raj.), whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner against order dated 08.08.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udaipurwati District Jhunjhunu of framing the charges under Section 498-A & 406 of IPC has been dismissed. 2. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the revisional Court has utterly failed to exercise its jurisdiction in right perspective and without examining the material on record, the revision petition has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier also one FIR was lodged by complainant, which resulted in filing of negative FR against the petitioner and again on the basis of similar facts FIR No.532/2014 [2025:RJ-JP:40651] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-2490/2019] was lodged by the complainant. It was submitted that on the basis of similar facts, no second FIR can be lodged by the complainant, however, ignoring all such statements, in quite mechanical manner the revision petition has been dismissed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the revision petition and submitted that earlier against impugned order dated 09.01.2019, revision petition was filed by the petitioner, which was withdrawn on 29.03.2019 without seeking any liberty to file the criminal misc. petition. Learned counsel also submitted that bare perusal of FIR No.532/2014 would reveal that even after submitting negative FR in respect of earlier FIR No.173/2014, the accused-petitioner committed cruelty for demand of dowry and, therefore, it cannot be said that on account of same incident second FIR has been lodged. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor further points out that in the instant matter after framing of the charge, the trial was proceeded further and out of total 18 witnesses, statement of 15 witness have already been recorded by learned trial Court. 5. Heard and considered. 6. This Court finds merit in the submission made by learned Public Prosecutor that earlier S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.350/2019 was filed by the petitioner against order dated 09.01.2019 and in the said revision petition, one defect was pointed out by the office of this Court in the light of provisions of Section 397(3) Cr.P.C., revision petition before this Court against the order passed in revision petition by the Sessions Judge is not maintainable. [2025:RJ-JP:40651] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-2490/2019] 7. Petitioner thereafter filed an application for treating the above criminal revision petition as criminal misc. petition, however, such application for conversion of revision petition into criminal misc. petition was also withdrawn by the petitioner. While withdrawing the Criminal Revision Petition No.350/2019, no liberty was sought by the petitioner, nor was he granted by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court for permitting the petitioner to file criminal misc. petition against order dated 09.01.2019. Under these circumstances, this criminal misc. petition cannot be entertained. 8. Even otherwise, in view of the fact that after framing of charge, trial has proceeded considerably in the manner that out of 18 witnesses, 15 witnesses have already been examined by learned trial Court, at this stage it would not be appropriate to exercise inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 9. Hence, in view of above, the instant criminal misc. petition filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed. 10. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any comments so as to affect the trial proceedings. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /1