Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1084 (RAJ)

Dharampal v. State of Rajasthan, Through PP

2023-05-11

FARJAND ALI

body2023
ORDER 1. The Investigating Officer is present in person before this Court along with the case diary of FIR No.346/2022 of P.S. Pilibanga. He apprised to this Court that when the complainant Rajat Kumar was examined by the Medical Officer, it was opined by him that the injuries sustained by the complainant were dangerous to life. 2. Subsequent to this, when the accused of this FIR approached the concerned Medical Officer seeking explanation regarding the nature of injury, the opinion for which had already been given by him; the Doctor unashamedly and contrary to his first opinion, gave a second opinion for the same injury to be simple in nature. The act of the doctor made a hue and cry in between the parties as well as the Investigating Agency and in this meantime, a case under the prevention of corruption Act got lodged against him and he was caught red handed while taking illegal gratification from the accused of this case. In the matter pertaining to prevention of corruption, the Doctor has been charge-sheeted. 3. In this view of the matter since there were two contrary reports on record, with a view to wipe out the ambiguous situation, the superior Officers deemed it appropriate to get examination of the victim Rajat Kumar again by a duly constituted Medical Board. An application on behalf of the accused Dharam Pal was also submitted in this regard. Both the applications were rejected by learned ACJM, Pilibhanga vide order date 21.10.2022. 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the State of Rajasthan as well as the accused preferred a revision petition, however, both the petitions have been rejected by a common order dated 21.01.2023 by the Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Hanumangarh which is under assail before this Court. 5. These criminal misc. petitions, one at the instance of accused and the other at the instance of State, have been preferred against the aforesaid orders passed by the courts below. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. The very purpose of conducting investigation in a criminal matter is to find out or to elicit truth behind the curtain as well as to examine or make necessary probe with regard to genuineness and truthfulness of the allegation levelled in the FIR and this is a task for which alone Investigating Agency has been formed besides crime prevention. 7. The very purpose of conducting investigation in a criminal matter is to find out or to elicit truth behind the curtain as well as to examine or make necessary probe with regard to genuineness and truthfulness of the allegation levelled in the FIR and this is a task for which alone Investigating Agency has been formed besides crime prevention. When an ambiguous situation and two conflicting reports with regard to the nature of injury of a same person has come on record then in such situation, for elucidation of the truth of the report, a further report by a duly constituted Medical Board, in my considered view, is a must to be prepared. 8. In view of this matter, the order dated 21.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Hanumangarh in Criminal Revision and the order dated 21.10.2022 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pilibanga in connection with the FIR No. 346/2022 are hereby quashed and set aside. The superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh is directed to make suitable application before the District Magistrate, Hanumangarh to constitute a Medical Board after consultation with the Principle Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Pilibanga within a period of 10 days from today. It shall be the duty of the Superintendent of Police to ensure the presence and availability of the complainant injured on the date fixed for the examination by the Medical Board. If any lame excuses are taken, the Superintendent of Police shall be at liberty to take coercive steps against him so as to ensure fair examination within prescribed time. 9. Shri Rajendra Choudhary, learned counsel for the complainant - victim, assures this Court that on the date fixed for the Medical Examination, the complainant would make himself available. 10. Both the Misc. petitions are allowed in the above terms. 11. Stay petitions also stand disposed of.