Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Mana Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan

Mana Ram vs State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Nov 02, 1989
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/768227

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 595 of 1989
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Penal Code - Section 376/109 and Criminal Procedure Code--Section 482--No allegation of commission of offence against petitioner--Petitioner present when occurrence took place--Held, he cannot be made to face trial;When in the statement under Section 161, Cr.PC and the statement under Section 164, Cr.PC there is no ...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mana Ram

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In
1989(2)WLN358

Excerpt

penal code - section 376/109 and criminal procedure code--section 482--no allegation of commission of offence against petitioner--petitioner present when occurrence took place--held, he cannot be made to face trial;when in the statement under section 161, cr.pc and the statement under section 164, cr.pc there is no allegation that the petitioner committed the offence under section 376, ipc read with section 109, ipc, then he cannot be made to face the trial merely because he was also present when the occurrence took place.;petition accepted. - .....this is not a stage for appreciating the evidence which has been collected by the prosecution in this case but what is to be seen is whether there are grounds for proceeding against the accused. charge has to be framed only on the basis of the material submitted along with the challan. it cannot be said that there are grounds for proceeding against the accused. the first information report alone cannot be said to be a substantive peace of evidence. in this case, when in the statement under section 161 cr. pc and statement under section 164 cr. pc there is no allegation that the petitioner committed the offence under section 376 ipc read with section 109 ipc, then he cannot be made to face the trial merely because he was also present when the occurrence took piece. in this case the acts attributed to this petitioner are not such, which cars call under the acts which constitute an offence of abatement. considering all these facts, it can be said that there are no reasonable grounds on basis of which it could be said that the petitioner should be made to face the trial for the offence under section 376 read with section 109 ipc.4. accordingly, this petition is accepted, the charge is quashed and the accused petitioner is discharged for the offence under section 376 read with section 109 ipc.

Full Judgment

Mohini Kapoor, J.

1. Heard, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. The petitioner has prayed that the charge against the petitioner for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 109, IPC should be quashed.

2. The case in brief is that, the prosecutrix Baby came to the residence of Shri Dungar Ram, MLA in the MLA quarters at Jaipur where on night time, one Rekha Ram committed rape with her. The allegation against the present petitioner is that he was standing outside and that he and others gave beating to her husband Dasrath Singh. In the FIR it has been mentioned that the present petitioner Mana Ram also entered the room in which the prosecutrix was sleeping with the intention to commit rape upon her. Thus story, given in the first information report has not been supported in the statement given under Section 161 Cr. PC and in the statement of the prosecutrix made under Section 164 Cr PC but only allegation is that he was also standing with others and that he had taken liquor with Rekharam and her husband Dasrath Singh prior to the occurrence.

3. This is not a stage for appreciating the evidence which has been collected by the prosecution in this case but what is to be seen is whether there are grounds for proceeding against the accused. Charge has to be framed only on the basis of the material submitted along with the challan. It cannot be said that there are grounds for proceeding against the accused. The First Information Report alone cannot be said to be a substantive peace of evidence. In this case, when in the statement under Section 161 Cr. PC and statement under Section 164 Cr. PC there is no allegation that the petitioner committed the offence under Section 376 IPC read with Section 109 IPC, then he cannot be made to face the trial merely because he was also present when the occurrence took piece. In this case the acts attributed to this petitioner are not such, which cars call under the acts which constitute an offence of abatement. Considering all these facts, it can be said that there are no reasonable grounds on basis of which it could be said that the petitioner should be made to face the trial for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 109 IPC.

4. Accordingly, this petition is accepted, the charge is quashed and the accused petitioner is discharged for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 109 IPC.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial