1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.517/2000 Ved Ram vs. State of Rajasthan Date of Order ::::: February 12,2009 Present HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN Mr. V.S.Chauhan for the petitioner Mr. K.S.Chandel, P.P. The petitioner has preferred this misc.petition against the order dated 5.12.1997 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Hindaun City accepting the Final report and also the order dated 5.3.1999 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindaun City dismissing the revision filed by the petitioner against the order of the trial court and upholding the order of the trial court. The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner lodged first information report No.131/1997 at the police station Hindaun City. The police after investigation submitted a 2 negative final report (No.127/1997). The petitioner then filed a protest petition. The trial court recorded statements of five witnesses including the complainant petitioner. However, the trial court on the basis of the evidence so recorded ordered that no prima facie case was made out against the accused, therefore, while accepting the final report rejected the protest petition of the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned P.P. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after recording the statements of the complainant and his witnesses the trial court should not have gone into the minute details of the evidence and what was to be seen by the trial court was as to whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the evidence available on record whether a prima facie case against the accused is made out or not. Learned counsel further submitted that the statements of the complainant and his witnesses so recorded clearly reveal that a prima facie case is made out against accused persons named therein but the learned courts below without 3 going into this aspect of the matter observed that it is not understandable that when the accused persons went to the house of the petitioner why beating was not given by them to him and, therefore, there is no ground for proceeding against them. But it is entirely a misconception of the case because in the night of the occurrence the accused persons having armed with lethal weapons went at the house of the petitioner and opened fire also. The petitioner in his statement has stated that he could not have seen the accused persons because of the darkness but it has been stated by the witnesses produced by him that the persons assemble there and also opened fire. The names of the accused persons are also there in the statements of the witnesses and the witnesses have specifically stated the names of the persons who gathered infront of the house of the petitioner and opened fires during dead of the night.Placing reliance on the judgment of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Makool Khan vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.{1998(2) RCC 67), learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that while dealing with statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. the Magistrate is not suppose to meticulously examine the evidence adduced by the 4 complainant. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned P.P. I have gone through the impugned orders and also the statements of the petitioner and his witnesses recorded by the trial court. From a bare perusal of the statement of the witnesses it cannot be said that no case is made out against the accused persons. Therefore, the courts below have committed error in accepting the negative final report and so also the revision petition filed by the petitioner. The trial court under misconception cannot be allowed to record contrary to what is available on record and cannot be permitted to dismiss the complaint on flimsy grounds. In the light of the observations made hereinabove, the orders passed by the courts below are not sustainable and deserve to be quashed. Consequently, this misc. petition is allowed and the order dated 5.12.1997 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Hindaun City accepting the final report and that of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hindaun City dated 5.3.1999 dismissing the 5 revision filed by the petitioner are quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial court for afresh decision after going through the entire record of the case. Office is directed to send the record of the case to the concerned court immediately. (Bhanwaroo Khan),J. bairwa