{"id":245274,"date":"2021-03-09T16:20:05","date_gmt":"2021-03-09T10:50:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=245274"},"modified":"2021-03-09T16:58:33","modified_gmt":"2021-03-09T11:28:33","slug":"judgment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/","title":{"rendered":"Raj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out “ratio decidendi”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Rajasthan High Court:<\/strong> Mahendra Kumar Goyal J., dismissed the petition being devoid of merits.<\/p>\n

The facts of the case are such that the petitioner was charged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120-B Penal Code, 1860 i.e. IPC. There is a categorical allegation against the petitioner forging and fabricating the transfer certificate of Class- VIII which he used along with his nomination papers submitted for contesting election for the post of Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Mundoti. The instant criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, i.e. CrPC. is filed against the order dated 05-12-2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sambhar Lake, District Jaipur whereby, the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 27-02-2017 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhar Lake, District Jaipur.<\/p>\n

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that allegation against him was of furnishing false information before the Returning Officer while submitting nomination papers and in view of provisions of Section 195(1)(a) CrPC, the complaint could have been filed by the public servant, i.e., by the Returning Officer only and no private complaint was maintainable. He further relied on a judgment Kiran Kanwar v State of Rajasthan, <\/em>S.B. Criminal Misc. (Petition) No.4345\/2019 stating that it involves identical facts and wherein proceedings which was initiated on behest of private complaint was quashed in view of the bar contained under Section 195(1)(a) CrPC.<\/p>\n

Counsel for the respondents submitted that in the present case, the allegations disclose commission of cognizable offence also and hence, the bar under Section 195 (1) (a) CrPC is not applicable. They, therefore, prayed that the criminal misc. petition be dismissed.<\/p>\n

Section 195(1) (a) Cr.P.C. provides as under:-<\/em><\/p>\n

“195. Prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public servants, for offences against public justice a for offences relating to documents given in evidence-(1)<\/em><\/p>\n

No Court shall take cognizance-<\/em><\/p>\n

(a) (i) of any offence punishable under sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), or<\/em><\/p>\n

(ii) of any abetment of, or attempt to commit, such offence, or<\/em><\/p>\n

(iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit such offence, except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate;”<\/em><\/p>\n

The Court thus observed that in the present case, the allegations, beside submitting false information with the Returning Officer, are with regard to forging and fabricating a document also, for which private complaint was very well maintainable. The judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of \u00a0Kiran Kanwar (supra)<\/em> has no applicability in the facts and circumstances of the present case.<\/p>\n

The Court thus held in regard to the case relied by the petitioners that \u201c it has specifically been observed that there was no allegation in the FIR of forging and fabricating any document, which is specifically levelled herein and hence, the same has no applicability in the facts and circumstances of the present case.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

In view of the above, petition was dismissed.[Laluram v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 55\/2020, decided on 24-02-2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Rajasthan High Court: Mahendra Kumar Goyal J., dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[12981,29785,37367,45411],"class_list":["post-245274","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-judgment","tag-law","tag-precedent","tag-private-complaint"],"yoast_head":"\nRaj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out "ratio decidendi" | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Judgment\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Raj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out "ratio decidendi"\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Judgment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-03-09T10:50:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-03-09T11:28:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/IMG_3584-e1487939870879.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/\",\"name\":\"Raj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out \\\"ratio decidendi\\\" | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-03-09T10:50:05+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-03-09T11:28:33+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Judgment\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Raj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out “ratio decidendi”\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Raj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out \"ratio decidendi\" | SCC Times","description":"Judgment","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Raj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out \"ratio decidendi\"","og_description":"Judgment","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-03-09T10:50:05+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-03-09T11:28:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/IMG_3584-e1487939870879.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/","name":"Raj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out \"ratio decidendi\" | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-03-09T10:50:05+00:00","dateModified":"2021-03-09T11:28:33+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Judgment","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/09\/judgment\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Raj HC | Judgment can be a binding precedent only for what has been considered and held in it; No Court can travel beyond facts mentioned and considered therein to cull out “ratio decidendi”"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":241489,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/30\/chh-hc-degree-of-proof-which-is-necessary-to-order-a-conviction-in-a-criminal-case-is-different-from-the-degree-of-proof-necessary-to-record-the-commission-of-delinquency-in-a-departmental-proceedin\/","url_meta":{"origin":245274,"position":0},"title":"Chh HC | Degree of proof which is necessary to order conviction in a criminal case is different from degree of proof necessary to record commission of delinquency in a departmental proceeding","author":"Editor","date":"December 30, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Chhattisgarh High Court: P. Sam Koshy J., dismissed the petition stating that no interference is required at this juncture keeping in mind the settled position of law. The facts of the case are such that Petitioner was working with the Respondents as Minig Sirdar, Grade-3. An FIR was lodged against\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":254869,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/29\/interdicting-a-criminal-proceeding-midcourse-on-ground-of-invalidity-of-the-sanction-order-not-appropriate-unless-failure-of-justice-has-occasioned-as-per-s-193-pc-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":245274,"position":1},"title":"Chh HC | Interdicting a criminal proceeding midcourse on ground of invalidity of the sanction order not appropriate unless failure of justice has occasioned as per S. 19(3) PC Act","author":"Editor","date":"September 29, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Chhattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K Agrawal, J. dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. Facts The facts of the case are such that the Chhattisgarh State Economic Crime Bureau and Anti Corruption Bureau registered an offence against the petitioner and other persons for offence under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":295003,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/20\/madhya-pradesh-high-court-fir-allegation-against-rape-accused-not-abetment-of-suicide\/","url_meta":{"origin":245274,"position":2},"title":"Allegations in FIR against rape accused cannot be considered as abetment of suicide: Madhya Pradesh High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"June 20, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed the FIR and consequential criminal proceedings arising thereafter.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/madhya-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/madhya-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/madhya-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/madhya-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291382,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/06\/not-everything-said-in-a-judgment-constitutes-precedent-supreme-court-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":245274,"position":3},"title":"Does everything said by a Judge while giving judgment constitute a precedent? Supreme Court explains","author":"Apoorva","date":"May 6, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court said that the distinction between obiter dicta and ratio decidendi in a judgment, as a proposition of law, has been examined by its several judgments.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"supreme court precedent","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/supreme-court-precedent.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/supreme-court-precedent.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/supreme-court-precedent.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/supreme-court-precedent.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":319123,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/02\/cant-withhold-promotion-and-keep-in-sealed-cover-due-to-28-year-old-pending-criminal-case-mp-hc-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":245274,"position":4},"title":"Promotion can\u2019t be kept in sealed cover due to pendency of 28-year-old criminal case: Madhya Pradesh High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"April 2, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court noted that petitioner, a police officer, was a member of the party which was deputed to nab a dreaded anti-social element of Uttar Pradesh, namely Kamaluddin.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":247679,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/27\/economic-offence\/","url_meta":{"origin":245274,"position":5},"title":"Ori HC |\u00a0An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the Community; Bail rejected","author":"Editor","date":"April 27, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Orissa High Court: S. K. Sahoo, J. rejected bail being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that one Roop Lal Meena, Deputy General Manager, Union Bank of India, Bhubaneswar lodged a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, CBI, Bhubaneswar stating therein that the accused bank\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245274","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=245274"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245274\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=245274"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=245274"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=245274"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}