Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1987 DIGILAW 745 (RAJ)

Allarakh v. State of Rajasthan

1987-09-17

K.S.LODHA

body1987
JUDGMENT 1. - I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By this petition, the petitioner wants to challenge the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sojat dated August 21, 1987, by which the petitioner, who is Supurdgidar of the truck in question, has been directed to produce the same before the court on the date when Shri Prahlad Singh, a witness, is to be examined in court on October 31, 1987. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that this truck was given in supurdgi to the petitioner when the challenge for offences under sections 467 and 468 along with s. 406, IPC was filed, but since now no charge for offences under Section 467 and 468 has been framed against the petitioner and the only charge for offence under Section 406, IPC has been framed and for the decision in respect of charge under Section 406, IPC the presence of the truck would not at all be necessary. 3. Learned Magistrate has of course observed that the presence of the truck before the court at the time when witness Prahlad Singh is examined, would be necessary. It will not be proper for me to go into this question, since it would amount to interference with the discretion exercised by the learned Magistrate. However, the contention that now the truck is not required before the court for the decision of charge under Section 406, IPC has not been raised before the trial court. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the decision of this Court in Allarak v. State of Raj., 1982 Raj. Cr. Cases 174 in respect of this very truck, followed by the fact that charges for offences under sections 467 and 468, IPC have not been framed the Supurdginama itself has become infructuous. 4. The petitioner will be free to move the trial court in this respect and if any such application is moved, it will be proper for the learned Magistrate to dispose it of before he insists upon the production of the truck. 5. With these observations, this application is disposed of.Order accordingly. *******