[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 1435/2006 RAJENDRA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN Date: 15.02.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Sanjay Mehla for the petitioner. Mr. Jagdish Lamba, Public Prosecutor for the State. **** The present criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 09.06.2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu in FIR No. 114/2000 registered at Police Station Gudha Gorji, Jhunjhunu, by which the Court below has rejected the application filed by the petitioner with the prayer to conduct identification parade from the prosecutrix Mst. Vimla so that the truth can come on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the interest of justice identification parade is necessarily required and the application moved on behalf of the petitioner has wrongly been rejected by the Court below. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State [2] and carefully gone through the order impugned dated 09.06.2006 passed by the Court below. While rejecting the application of the petitioner, the Court below has observed that such application can be moved by the prosecution and it is for the prosecution to investigate into the matter and move such an application. It is also observed that proceedings under Section 82,83 Cr.P.C. are pending against the petitioner and standing arrest warrant has also been issued against him. It appears that the petitioner has not appeared before the trial Court and the trial is held up and, therefore, application of the petitioner has been rejected. This is second round of litigation by the petitioner. Earlier also the petitioner had filed a misc. petition before this Court which was registered as S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 952/2006, whereby this Court has observed that the petitioner should first approach the concerned Magistrate for directions to conduct identification parade of the accused petitioner from the prosecutrix. After filing application which has been rejected, again the present criminal misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner. [3] Having heard rival submissions of the respective parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, this Court deem it proper to quash and set aside the order impugned dated 09.06.2006 so far as the rejection of the application of the petitioner seeking identification parade is concerned and remand the matter back to the Court below and in case the petitioner surrenders before the Court concerned and co-operate with the trial, the application of the petitioner be considered afresh on its merit and if the petitioner failed to surrender, the order impugned shall remain in force. With these observations, the misc. petition stands disposed of. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/