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.

Mahendra Singh @ Bablo Vs. State

Mahendra Singh @ Bablo vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided May 18, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/973707

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

Mahendra Singh @ Bablo

Respondent

State

Excerpt

1 s.b. criminal misc.petition no.755/2012 mahendra singh @ bablo vs. state of rajasthan date of order:18. 05.2012 hon'ble mr. justice sandeep mehta mr.r.k.charan, for the petitioner. mr.a.r.nikub, public prosecutor. the instant misc.petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 17.02.2012 passed by learned additional session judge, no. 1, chittorgarh in sessions case no. 24/2011(63/2010) whereby the application filed by the petitioner under section 311 cr.p.c. has been rejected. the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that shri v.c.jain was appointed for pleading the matter on behalf of the petitioner but he expired and owing to his death, proper cross-examination of various witnesses could not be conducted. he submits that when this mistake was realised, an application was moved for recalling the witnesses for cross examination but the same was rejected for the reason that appropriate & detailed facts were not revealed in the application. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner be permitted to file a fresh application under section 311 cr.p.c. after stating all the facts in detail before the court below, so that the petitioner can agitate his grievances before the trial court by way of a proper statement of facts. the prayer appears to be reasonable. the misc. petition is disposed of and now the petitioner is permitted to file a fresh application under section 311 cr.p.c. after stating all the facts in detail and the learned trial court shall decide the application keeping in view the 2 fact as to whether the proper cross-examination of the witnesses, who have been examined subsequent to the death of the petitioner's counsel shri v.c. jain has been conducted in this case or not. the misc.petition & stay petition are disposed of. (sandeep mehta), j.bhart

Full Judgment

1 S.B. Criminal Misc.Petition No.755/2012 Mahendra Singh @ Bablo Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of Order:

18. 05.2012 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA Mr.R.K.Charan, for the petitioner. Mr.A.R.Nikub, Public Prosecutor. The instant misc.petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 17.02.2012 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, No. 1, Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No. 24/2011(63/2010) whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that Shri V.C.Jain was appointed for pleading the matter on behalf of the petitioner but he expired and owing to his death, proper cross-examination of various witnesses could not be conducted. He submits that when this mistake was realised, an application was moved for recalling the witnesses for cross examination but the same was rejected for the reason that appropriate & detailed facts were not revealed in the application. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner be permitted to file a fresh application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. after stating all the facts in detail before the Court below, so that the petitioner can agitate his grievances before the trial Court by way of a proper statement of facts. The prayer appears to be reasonable. The misc. petition is disposed of and now the petitioner is permitted to file a fresh application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. after stating all the facts in detail and the learned trial Court shall decide the application keeping in view the 2 fact as to whether the proper cross-examination of the witnesses, who have been examined subsequent to the death of the petitioner's counsel Shri V.C. Jain has been conducted in this case or not. The misc.petition & stay petition are disposed of. (SANDEEP MEHTA), J.

Bhart

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial