KEDARMAL MAHARIA S/O SHRI HANUMANARAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/1099/2021 · 2025-07-31
Praveer Bhatnagar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5618 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5618 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:29072] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.1099/2021 Kedarmal Maharia S/o Shri Hanumanaram, R/o House No. 1264, Ward No. 55, Surya Nagar Piprali Road, Sikar. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Parmender Dadhich, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Order 31/07/2025
1. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 11.01.2021, whereby, the petitioner’s prayer for sending the visara of the deceased Rajpriya to Central Forensic Laboratory at Hyderabad was denied.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the opinion given by the Medical jurist about the cause of death of the deceased is contrary to the fact and the petitioner filed a complaint against the concerned doctors and after due inquiry by Rajasthan Medical Council, the matter was directed to be placed before the General Committee. It is also contended that the doctors who conducted postmortem report of the deceased have given wrong opinion. Therefore, the fresh opinion may be sought after conducting fresh forensic test of deceased visara’s.
3. Heard and perused the material available on record.
[2025:RJ-JP:29072] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1099/2021]
4. In the impugned order dated 11.01.2021, petitioner sought relief for re-analysis of deceased visara’s from the Central Forensic Lab at Hyderabad, the Court after hearing both the parties opined that there are no grounds to sent visara’s of deceased for re-
analysis to the Central Forensic Lab Hyderabad as the petitioner failed to indicate that how the previous FSL report of the deceased is doubtful.
5. Considering the above fact, I do not find any infirmity or perversity in the order passed by the learned Court below, if the petitioner is questioning the postmortem report conducted by the concerned doctors than the petitioner is free to raise the said objection before the concerned Court.
6. Accordingly, the instant petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-10