[ad_1]
Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Atta Mohammad vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:29432) on 8 July, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:29432]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 820/2025
1. Atta Mohammad S/o Ismail Khan, Aged About 65 Years,
2. Arab Khan S/o Yusuf Khan, Aged About 50 Years,
3. Akram Khan S/o Haji Anwar Khan, Aged About 45 Years,
4. Sikandar Khan S/o Asgar Khan, Aged About 45 Years,
5. Jumma Khan S/o Babu Khan, Aged About 50 Years,
6. Abid Khan S/o Manjur Khan, Aged About 45 Years,
7. Ristam Khan S/o Ibrahim Khan, Aged About 45 Years,
8. Imaran Kahn S/o Atta Moahhamad, Aged About 38 Years,
9. Sanwar Khan S/o Iqbal Khan, Aged About 30 Years,
10. Chunna Ram S/o Ukka Ji, Aged About 50 Years,
11. Iqbal Khan S/o Ismail Khan, Aged About 57 Years,
12. Gul Mohammad Khan S/o Ismil Khan, Aged 55 Years,
13. Amjad Khan S/o Atta Mohammad, Aged About 45 Years,
14. Anwar Khan S/o Najir, Aged About 50 Years,
15. Faruq Khan S/o Najir Jumme Khan, Aged About 32 Years,
16. Mohhamad Aarif S/o Gulam Rasul, Aged About 37 Years,
17. Unna Ram S/o Lumbaji, Aged About 36 Years,
18. Raja Ram @ Raju S/o Idan, Aged About 35 Years,
19. Ranjeet Puri S/o Hans Puri, Aged About 38 Years,
20. Kalu Ram S/o Puna Ji, Aged About 50 Years,
21. Mohan Lal S/o Prem Ram, Aged About 45 Years,
22. Kalu Ram S/o Deva Ji, Aged About 30 Years,
23. Deva Ram S/o Kheta Ji, Aged About 40 Years,
24. Prema Ram S/o Unna Ji @ Ukka Ji, Aged About 50 Years,
25. Arjun Kumar S/o Kana Ram, Aged About 30 Years,
26. Bheeka Ram S/o Mula Ram, Aged About 60 Years,
27. Mangi Lal S/o Vira Ji, Aged About 32 Years,
28. Sawa Ram S/o Idan Ram, Aged About 40 Years,
29. Ganesh Ram S/o Chunni Lal, Aged About 45 Years,
petitioners No.1 to 29 are resident of Village Krishanganj,
P.s. Anadara, Tehsil Reodar District Sirohi, Rajasthan.
30. Mahendra Singh S/o Mag Singh, Aged About 49 Years,
(Downloaded on 10/07/2025 at 09:34:54 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:29432] (2 of 4) [CRLR-820/2025]
R/o village Sawada, P.s. Anadra Sirohi
31. Dinesh Kumar S/o Hijadi, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Village Sirodi, P.s. Anadara Sirohi
32. Praveen Kumar S/o Rama Ji, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Village Posintra, P.s. Anadara Sirohi.
33. Daya Ram S/o Jaisa Ji, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village
Gulabganj P.s. Anadara Sirohi
34. Jagga Ram S/o Khuba Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Village Sirodi, P.s. Anadara Sirohi
35. Prabhu Ram S/o Bhura Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Village Siloya, P.s.kalandri Sirohi
36. Gokul Ram S/o Sawaji, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village
Isra, P.s. Swaroop Ganj Sirohi
37. Nawa Ram S/o Bharka Ji, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Village Sanwada, P.s. Anadara Sirohi
38. Rakesh S/o Ratan Lal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village
Sanwada, P.s. Anadara Sirohi
39. Amrit Lal S/o Daya Lal, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Pamera
At Present Sirodi, P.s. Anadara Sirohi
40. Prakash Kumar S/o Teja Ram, Aged About 42 Years, R/o
Village Anadara Sirohi
41. Narendra Kumar S/o Sona Ji, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Reodar, P.s. Reodar, Sirohi
42. Jhala Ram S/o Rawata Ji, Aged About 47 Years, R/o
Village Posintra Sirohi
43. Jaswant Kumar S/o Prabhu Ram @ Prabha Shankar, Aged
About 41 Years, R/o Village Malgaon, P.s. Anandara,
Sirohi, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
(Downloaded on 10/07/2025 at 09:34:54 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:29432] (3 of 4) [CRLR-820/2025]
Order
08/07/2025
The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioners
against the order dated 20.06.2025, passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi in Sessions Case No.82/2018,
whereby the learned Judge dismissed the application under
Section 321 Cr.P.C. filed by the State for withdrawal of the
prosecution against the petitioners.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that apart from the
present case, two more cases were registered against the present
petitioners i.e. Sessions Case No.02/2017 (25/2016) for offences
under Sections 148, 341, 323/149, 324/149, 427/149, 307/149,
153A IPC and Sessions Case No.29/2016 (CIS No.25/2016) for
offences under Sections 148, 341, 323/149, 324/149, 325/149,
307/149 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act. In both the cases,
the petitioners were acquitted vide order dated 25.09.2019 passed
by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Cases, Sirohi. Counsel submits that all the three cases are related
to the same incidents. Counsel further submits that during the
pendency of the case, compromise was arrived at between the
parties and therefore, the State filed an application under Section
321 Cr.P.C. for withdrawal of the prosecution against the
petitioners for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323,
324, 325, 283, 332, 353, 435, 505, 307, 153A of IPC and Section
3 of PDPP Act and Sections 3/25, 3/27 of Arms Act, but the same
was dismissed by the trial court without any cogent reason.
Counsel submits that since the petitioners were acquitted by the
trial court in other two cases and in the present case, compromise
(Downloaded on 10/07/2025 at 09:34:54 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:29432] (4 of 4) [CRLR-820/2025]
has also been arrived at between the parties, therefore, the order
of the trial court being per se illegal be set aside and the
petitioners may also be discharged in the present case.
Learned Public Prosecutor stated the fact that the State
Government is desirous to withdraw the case pending between the
parties.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
impugned order as well as carefully gone through the material
available on record.
Considering the facts that compromise has been arrived at
between the parties and the State Government is desirous to
withdraw the case pending between the parties and in two other
cases, the petitioners have already been acquitted by the trial
court, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be
served to continue the proceedings pending in the present case
between the parties.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated 20.06.2025, passed
by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi in Sessions Case
No.82/2018 is set aside and the petitioners are discharged from
the charges for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323,
324, 325, 283, 332, 353, 435, 505, 307, 153A of IPC and Section
3 of PDPP Act and Sections 3/25, 3/27 of Arms Act.
The revision petition is decided accordingly.
Stay application is also decided.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
113-MS/-
(Downloaded on 10/07/2025 at 09:34:54 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_2]
Source link