Crlmp No.1472/10. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CR.MISC.PETITION NO.1472/2010. Rameshwar & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of order : 26/10/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri R.K. Agarwal and Shri Pankaj Gupta for petitioners. Shri Peeyush Kumar, Public Prosecutor for State. ****** BY THE COURT:- This misc.petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused petitioner on the apprehension that observations made by learned Additional District Judge, Kotputli vide judgment dated 31/3/2006 passed in Civil Suit No.1/2001 wherein it had expressed doubt about genuineness of agreement to sale, would weigh with the court in which appeal has been filed by the petitioners against the order of their conviction passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotputli, since it is the same court which was hearing the appeal. Petitioners apprehend that this court might be biased or prejudiced by those observations and therefore hearing of the Crlmp No.1472/10. 2 appeal should be deferred till decision of the first appeal filed by the petitioners against the aforesaid judgment before this Court. It is contended that the appeal has been admitted and status-quo order has been passed directing complainant not to alienate the property, which in my considered view, is illusory and not tenable. I have cursorily gone through the order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Kotputli dated 23/2/2007 whereby petitioners have been convicted. Although, it is true that reference to this observation made by the District Judge, Kotputli in judgment dated 31/3/2006 has been made but then, the learned court has discussed other evidence as well to arrive at the conclusion. In my considered opinion, apprehension of the petitioners are mere illusory than real. However, without commenting on the merits of the judgment of conviction, I merely observe that the appellate court when it is not having same presiding officer and is now manned by different presiding officer, would obviously independently examine appeal on its own merit, to arrive at the conclusion whether or not Crlmp No.1472/10. 3 conviction of the petitioners can be sustained independently on evidence and un-influenced by those observations because in law standard of proof that is required to convict the accused is that the alleged offences against him should have been proved beyond all reasonable doubt. This criminal misc.petition is misconceived and is dismissed with the aforesaid observation. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil Crlmp No.1472/10. 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CR.MISC.STAY APPLICATION 1323/2010. In S.B. CR.MISC.PETITION NO.1472/2010. Rameshwar & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of order : 26/10/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri R.K. Agarwal and Shri Pankaj Gupta for applicant-petitioners. Shri Peeyush Kumar, Public Prosecutor for State. ****** BY THE COURT:- Consequent upon dismissal of the main petition, this stay application does not survive and the same is also dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil