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.

Brijmohan Goyal Vs. State

Brijmohan Goyal vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Feb 05, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/973272

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 Jodhpur High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Brijmohan Goyal

Respondent

State

Excerpt

1. s.b. criminal revision petition no. 398/1999 (brijmohan goyal vs. state of rajasthan) date of order :5. 2.2013 hon'ble mr. justice sandeep mehta none present for the petitioner. mr. a.r. nikub, public prosecutor. the instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner in his capacity as a junior engineer, rajasthan state electricity board, jodhpur being aggrieved of the order dated 15.3.1999 passed by the learned addl. civil judge & judicial magistrate (city), jodhpur in case no.50/1998 arising out of fir no.35/1998, whereby, the fr filed by the police has been accepted and the protest petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected. the petitioner being the official of the rseb filed an fir with the allegation that when the asst. engineer and junior engineer of rseb visited the board's sub-station in question, it was found that store room was opened and articles lying therein were missing and the accused had committed trespass by breaking the locks. during the course of the investigation, the investigating agency was not able to collect any evidence to the effect that they had seen the so called suspects breaking the locks of the store room in question. on the contrary, various witnesses have been examined, who have stated that the electricity boards' sub-station was shifted from 2. the premises in question in the year 1995 itself. in this view of the matter, this court is of the opinion that the learned trial court has committed no error in accepting the fr filed by the police and rejecting the protest petition filed by the petitioner. the order passed by the learned trial court is a detailed and well reasoned order and cannot be said to be suffering from any illegality or irregularity. resultantly, this revision petition being bereft of any force is hereby dismissed. (sandeep mehta), j.ms rathore

Full Judgment

1. S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 398/1999 (Brijmohan Goyal Vs. State of Rajasthan) DATE OF ORDER :

5. 2.2013 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA None present for the petitioner. Mr. A.R. Nikub, Public Prosecutor. The instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner in his capacity as a Junior Engineer, Rajasthan State Electricity Board, Jodhpur being aggrieved of the order dated 15.3.1999 passed by the learned Addl. Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate (City), Jodhpur in Case No.50/1998 arising out of FIR No.35/1998, whereby, the FR filed by the police has been accepted and the protest petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected. The petitioner being the official of the RSEB filed an FIR with the allegation that when the Asst. Engineer and Junior Engineer of RSEB visited the board's sub-station in question, it was found that store room was opened and articles lying therein were missing and the accused had committed trespass by breaking the locks. During the course of the investigation, the Investigating Agency was not able to collect any evidence to the effect that they had seen the so called suspects breaking the locks of the store room in question. On the contrary, various witnesses have been examined, who have stated that the electricity boards' sub-station was shifted from 2. the premises in question in the year 1995 itself. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial court has committed no error in accepting the FR filed by the police and rejecting the protest petition filed by the petitioner. The order passed by the learned trial court is a detailed and well reasoned order and cannot be said to be suffering from any illegality or irregularity. Resultantly, this revision petition being bereft of any force is hereby dismissed. (SANDEEP MEHTA), J.

ms rathore

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial