ANNEXURE ‘Y’

ADVOCATE’S CHECK LIST (TO BE CERTIFIED BY ADVOCATE-ON-

RECORD)
Indicate Yes or NA
1. SLP(C) has been filed in Form No. 28 with certificate. N/A
2. The Petition is as per the provisions of Order XV Rule 1. Yes

3. The papers of SLP have been arranged as per Order XXI, Rule (3) Yes
(1)(f).

4. Brief list of dates/events has been filed. Yes

5. Paragraphs and pages of paper books have been numbered Yes

consecutively and correctly noted in Index.

6. Proper and required number of paper books (1 + 1) have been Yes

filed.

7. The contents of the petition, applications and accompanying Yes

documents are clear, legible and typed in double space on one
side of the paper.

8. The particulars of the Common Impugned judgment passed by the Yes

court(s) below are uniformly written in all the documents.

9. In case of appeal by certificate the appeal is accompanied by N/A

judgment and decree appealed from and order granting certificate.

10. If the petition is time barred, application for condonation of delay N/A
mentioning the no. of days of delay, with affidavit and court fee
has been filed.

11. The Annexures referred to in the petition are true copies of the Yes
documents before the court(s) below and are filed in
chronological order as per List of Dates.

12. The annexures referred to in the petition are filed and indexed Yes
separately and not marked collectively.

13. The relevant provisions of the Constitution, statutes, ordinances, Yes

rules, regulations, bye laws, orders etc. referred to in the Common
Impugned judgment / order has been filed as Appendix to the
 SLP.

14. In SLP against the order passed in Second Appeal, copies of the N/A
orders passed by the Trial Court and First Appellate Court have
been filed.

15. The complete listing proforma has been filled in, signed and Yes
included in the paper books.

16. In a petition (PIL) filed under clause (d) of Rule 12(1) Order N/A
XXXVIII, the Petitioner has disclosed:
(a) his full name, complete postal address, e-mail address, phone
number, proof regarding personal identification, occupation
and annual income, PAN number and National Unique
Identity Card number, if any;

(b) the facts constituting the cause of action;

(c) the nature of injury caused or likely to be caused to the

public;

(d) the nature and extent of personal interest, if any, of the

petitioner(s);

(e) details regarding any Civil, Criminal or revenue litigation,

involving the Petitioner or any of the petitioners, which has
or could have a legal nexus with the issue(s) involved in the
Public Interest Litigation.

17. If any identical matter is pending/disposed of by the Hon'ble Yes

Supreme Court, the complete particulars of such matters have
been given.

18. The statement in terms of the Order XIX Rule 3(1) of Supreme Yes
Court Rules 2013 has been given in the Petition of appeal.

19. Whether a Bank Draft of Rs.50,000/- or 50% of the amount, N/A

whichever is less, has been deposited by the person intending to
appeal, if required to be paid as per the order of the NCDRC, in
terms of Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

20. In case of appeals under Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, the N/A
Petitioner / appellant has moved before the Armed Forces
 Tribunal for granting certificate for leave to appeal to the
Supreme Court.

21. All the paper-books to be filed after curing the defects shall be in Yes
order.
I hereby declare that I have personally verified the petition and its
contents and it is in conformity with the Supreme Court Rules 2013. I
certify that the above requirements of this Check List have been
complied with. I further certify that all the documents necessary for the
purpose of hearing of the matter have been filed.

Signature
AoR’s Name Prabodh kumar
AoR Code 2406
Contact No. 9540857139
New Delhi
Date:
 Diary No.________/2022

DECLARATION

All defects have been duly cured. Whatever has

been/deleted/modified in the Petition is the result of curing of

defects and nothing else. Except curing the defects. Nothing

has been done. Paper Books are complete in all respects.

Signature

AoR’s Name Prabodh kumar

2406
AoR Code
9540857139
Contact No.
 PROFORMA FOR FIRST LISTING
SECTION - _II-A _
The case pertains to (Please tick/check the correct box):
√ Central Act: (Title) Indian Penal Code
√ Section:_______________________________________
Central Rule: (Title) _ N/A
Rule No(s): _ N/A
State Act: (Title) _ N/A
Section: N/A
State Rule: (Title) _ N/A
Rule No(s): _ N/A
Impugned Interim Order: (Date) __N/A____________________
√ Impugned Final Order/Decree: (Date) _22.11.2021___________
√ High Court: (Name) High Court of Judicature at Rajasthan
√ Names of Judges: Hon'ble mr. Justice Sandeep Mehta Justice Sameer Jain
Tribunal/Authority: (Name) _N/A

1. Nature of matter: X Civil √ Criminal

2. (a) Petitioner/Appellant No.1: NARAYAN SINGH

(b) e-mail ID: _ N/A ______________

(c) Mobile Phone Number: _ N/A _________

3. (a) Respondent No.1: _STATE OF RAJASTHAN

(b) e-mail ID: _ N/A

(c) Mobile Phone Number: _ N/A

A-2
4. (a) Main category classification: 14 CRIMINAL MATTER
(b) Sub classification: 1407 OTHERS.
5. Not to be listed before: _ N/A
6. (a) Similar disposed of matter with citation, if any, & case details: No
Similar matter disposed of

(b) Similar pending matter with case details: No similar matter pending
7. Criminal Matter: Yes.
(a) Whether accused/convict has surrendered: X Yes √ No

(b) FIR/C.R. No. Date:

(c) Police Station:
(d) Sentence Awarded: _ Bail dismissed by High Court
(e) Period of sentence undergone including period of Detention/Custody
undergone N/A

8. Land Acquisition Matter: N/A

(a) Date of Section 4 notification: _ N/A
(b) Date of Section 6 notification: _ N/A
(c) Date of Section 17 notification: _ N/A
9. Tax Matter: State the tax effect: _ N/A
10. Special Category (first Petitioner/Appellant Only): N/A
Senior Citizen > 65 SC/ Woman/ Disabl Legal
years ST Child ed
Aid In custody
case
11. Vehicle Number (in case of Motor Accident Claim Matters): N/A

Filed by

[Prabodh kumar]
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Order XXII Rule 2(1)
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO____OF 2022
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)
(Arising out of the impugned Judgment and final order dated
21.09.2022 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature for
Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail
Application No.14239/2022)
IN THE MATTER OF:
NARAYAN SINGH …PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF RAJASTHAN …RESPONDENTS

WITH
I.A.No.______________of 2022
[AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF LEAVE TO APPEAL
BEFORE THE HON’BLE COURT]

AND
I.A.No.______________of 2022
[AN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING
CERTIFIED COPY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER]

AND
I.A.No.______________of 2022
[AN APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO FILE
THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION]

PAPER BOOK
(FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)

ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER:

PRABODH KUMAR
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
S. NO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PAGES
 INDEX

Sl. Particulars of Documents Page No. of part Remarks

No. to which it
Court Fees _____/-
belongs
Part-I Part-II
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)
1. O/R of Limitation A A
2. Listing Proforma A1-A2 A1-A2
3. Cover page of Paper Book A-3
4. Index of Record of Proceedings A-4
5. Limitation Report prepared by the A-5
Registry
6. Defect List A-6
7. Note Sheet NS1
to
8. Synopsis and List of Dates
9. Impugned Order- Details
Judgment and final order dated
21.09.2022 passed by the Hon’ble
High Court of Judicature for
Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench in S.B.
Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail
Application No.14239/2022;
10. Special Leave Petition (Crl) with
Affidavit.
11. APPENDIX
Section 147, 148, 149, 447, 341,
323, 325, 307, 302 of I.P.C.
12. Annexure P-1
The copy of the FIR no 275/2020
along with true typed copy.
13. Annexure P-2
The copy of Statement of witness
under Section 161, Code of
criminal procedure, 1973, along
with true typed copies.
14. Annexure P-3
The copy of chargesheet dated
02.01.2021.
15. Annexure P-4
The copy of the order dated
30.01.2021 of the trial court along
with the true typed copy.
16. Annexure P-5
The copy of order dated
25.03.2021 of Hon’ble High Court
 of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench
bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. 2883/2021.
17. Annexure P-6
The true copy of order dated
24.02.2022 of Hon’ble High Court
of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench
bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. 18177/2021.
18. Annexure P-7
The true copy of the order dated
05.05.2022 of this Hon’ble court
in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No. 3733/2022.
19. Annexure P-8
The copy of order on charge dated
04.06.2022 by the Ld. Trial court.
20. Annexure P-9
The true copy of the order dated
08.09.2022 of the trial court along
with the true typed copy.
21. Filing Memo
22. Vakalatnama with Memo of
Appearance
23. Memo of parties
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Order XXII Rule 2(1)
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO____OF 2022
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)
IN THE MATTER OF:
NARAYAN SINGH …PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF RAJASTHAN …RESPONDENTS

OFFICE REPORT OF LIMITATION
1. The Petition is/are within time.

2. The Petition is not barred by time and there is no delay in

filing the present SLP assailing the impugned Judgment and
final order dated 21.09.2022 passed by the Hon’ble High
Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench in S.B.
Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No.14239/2022.

3. There is delay of………… days in re-filing the petition

and application for condonation of………… days delay in re-
filing has been filed.

BRANCH OFFICER

NEW DELHI.

Dated:
 SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES

The present Special Leave Petition is preferred against the

impugned judgment/order dated 21.09.2022 in Bail Application

No.14239/2022 submitted by the Hon’ble High Court of

Judicature For Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench under Section 439 of the

Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 275/2020 registered at Police

Station Halaina, Distruct Bharatpur for the offences punishable

under Sections 147, 148, 149, 447, 341, 323, 325, 307 & 302 of

IPC.

Brief facts :

That the complainant Sahab Singh submitted a report to the SHO

Police Station Halaina. District Bharatpur and upon that report

the police registered a case bearing FIR No. 275/2020 for the

aforesaid offences.

That after completion of investigation the police has submitted

charge sheet against the accused petitioner and other persons for

the aforesaid offences.

That during course of investigation the petitioner was arrested on

06.10.2020 thereafter the petitioner moved bail application

bearing no. 24/2021 in the Ld. Trial Court and the same was

dismissed vide order dated 30.01.2021.

That thereafter the petitioner moved bail application before the

Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench bearing S.B.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2883/2021 and the same has

been dismissed vide order dated 25.03.2021.

That thereafter the petitioner moved second high court bail

application bearing No. 18177/2021 and the same was dismissed

by the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench on

24.02.2022 on the ground that there is no change in the facts and

circumstances of the present case.

That thereafter the petitioner moved Special Leave to Appeal

(Crl.) No. 3733/2022 before this Hon’ble court against the order

of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench on

24.02.2022 and the Petitioner as per order dated 05.05.2022, was

instructed to review his prayer for bail before for this Hon’ble

court after charges have been framed by the trial court and now

since the charges have been framed by the trial court the

Petitioner seeks this Hon’ble court for his prayer for bail.

The trial court framed charges against the Petitioner along with

other co-accused persons for the offences under section 147, 148,

149, 447, 341, 323, 323/149, 325, 325/149, 307, 307/149, 302,

302/34 of I.P.C..
That after framing of charges the Petitioner moved fresh bail

application bearing. No. 124/2022 before the learned trial court

and the same has been dismissed vide order dated 08.09.2022.

That thereafter the Petitioner moved third high court bail

application bearing No. 14239/2022 and the same was dismissed

by the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench on

21.09.2022 on the ground that there is no change in the facts and

circumstances of the present case since the rejection of the

second bail application.

Hence this petition.

LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS

05.10.2020 Date of incident where at around 7:30 in the

morning a fight broke out between the

accused persons and the complainant group

relating to a incident involving exterior

fence/walls of a farm of the complainant

group. A person died in this fight, and several

were injured of both the groups.

FIR was filed by both the parties in the

evening but due to the complainant group

filing their FIR earlier than the accused, their

 FIR no 275/2020 was cognized and accused

persons were arrested. The copy of the FIR no

275/2020 along with true typed copy is

annexed as Annexure P-1 at Page No _____

to _______.

06.10.2020 The Petitioner and other accused were

arrested and the Petitioner has been in jail

since then and more than 2 years have passed

since he is in jail. Statement of witnesses

under Section 161, Code of criminal

procedure, 1973 was also recorded on the

same day. The copies of Statement of witness

under Section 161, Code of criminal

procedure, 1973, along with true typed copies

are annexed as Annexure P-2 at Page No

_____ to _______.

02.01.2021 Charge sheet filed by the police after

investigation dated 02.01.2021. The copy of

the charge sheet dated 02.01.2021 along with

true typed copy is annexed as Annexure P-3

at Page No _____ to _______.

30.01.2021 The Petitioner moved bail application bearing

 no. 24/2021 in the Ld. Trial Court and the

same was dismissed vide order dated

30.01.2021. The true typed copy is annexed as

Annexure P-4 at Page No _____ to _______.

25.03.2021 The petitioner moved bail application before

the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur

Bench bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail

Application No. 2883/2021 and the same has

been dismissed vide order dated 25.03.2021.

The copy of order dated 25.03.2021 of

Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur

Bench bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail

Application No. 2883/2021 is annexed as

Annexure P-5 at Page No _____ to _______.

24.02.2022 The petitioner moved second high court bail

application bearing No. 18177/2021 and the

same was dismissed by the Hon’ble High

Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench on

24.02.2022 on the ground that there is no

change in the facts and circumstances of the

present case. The copy of order dated

24.02.2022 of Hon’ble High Court of

 Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench bearing S.B.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.

18177/2021 is annexed as Annexure P-6 at

Page No _____ to _______.

05.05.2022 The petitioner moved Special Leave to

Appeal (Crl.) No. 3733/2022 before this

Hon’ble court against the order of Hon’ble

High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench on

24.02.2022 and the Petitioner as per order

dated 05.05.2022, was instructed to review his

prayer for bail before for this Hon’ble court

after charges have been framed by the trial

court. The copy of the order dated 05.05.2022

of this Hon’ble court in Special Leave to

Appeal (Crl.) No. 3733/2022 is annexed as

Annexure P-7 at Page No _____ to _______.

04.06.2022 The trial court framed charges against the

Petitioner along with other co-accused

persons for the offences under section 147,

148, 149, 447, 341, 323, 323/149, 325,

325/149, 307, 307/149, 302, 302/34 of I.P.C.

The copy of the order on charge dated

 04.06.2022 by the Ld. Trial court is along

with true typed copy is annexed and marked

as Annexure P-8 at Page No _____ to

_______.

08.09.2022 After framing of charges the Petitioner moved

fresh bail application bearing no. 124/2022

before the learned trial court and the same has

been dismissed vide order dated 08.09.2022.

The copy of the order dated 08.09.2022 of the

trial court along with the true typed copy is

annexed and marked herein as Annexure P-9

at Page No _____ to _______.

21.09.2022 The Petitioner moved third high court bail

application bearing No. 14239/2022 and the

same was dismissed by the Hon’ble High

Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench on

21.09.2022 on the ground that there is no

change in the facts and circumstances of the

present case since the rejection of the second

bail application.

Hence, the aggrieved Petitioner has filed the

present Special Leave Petition against the

impugned judgment dated 21.09.2022
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Order XXII Rule 2(1)
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO____OF 2022
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)
(Arising out of the impugned Judgment and final order dated
21.09.2022 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature for
Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail
Application No.14239/2022)

IN THE MATTER OF POSITION OF PARTIES

Before Before High In this

Trial Court Hon’ble
Court Court

Narayan Singh S/o Teekam Singh Accused Appellant Petitioner

R/o Mudiya Gandhar, Police Station
Halaina, District Bharatpur

Versus

1. STATE OF RAJASTHAN Complainant Respondent Respondent

TO
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND
HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE HON’BLE 
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
 
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE
PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED 
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. The present Special Leave Petition is preferred under

Article 136 of the Constitution of India seeking leave to

appeal against the final judgment and order and final order

dated 21.09.2022 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of

Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench in S.B. Criminal

Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No.14239/2022.

2. QUESTIONS OF LAW:

The following substantial questions of law of general

importance arise for the consideration by this Hon’ble

Court in the present Special Leave Petition:

A. Was the Hon. High Court justified in ignoring crucial

principle of law that similarly placed accused should be

granted bail on parity?

B. Was the High Court justified in ignoring the law followed

in Shiv Mohan Kapoor vs State Of U.P. & Anr (2012) Cr.

Appl 522/2012, and in many other various judgements

where bail has been granted on parity?

C. Was the High Court justified in ignoring the legal

jurisprudence held in the judgement of Supreme Court in

 Dataram Singh vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh [(2018) 3

SCC 22]?

D. Was the High Court and trial court justified in ignoring the

discrepancies in evidence clearly highlighting that the FIR

is false and concocted?

E. Whether the impugned judgement is based on conjectures

and surmises, in light of the available evidence ?

F. Whether the Hon’ble High Court erred in ignoring all the

Circumstantial Evidence which was relied upon ?

3. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 2(2):

The Petitioner states that no other petition seeking leave to

appeal has been filed by him against the impugned

Judgment and final order dated 21.09.2022 passed by the

Hon’ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur

Bench in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3 rd Bail Application

No.14239/2022.

4. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 4:

 The annexures A-1 to A-6 produced along with the Special

Leave Petition are true copies of the pleadings/documents

which formed part of the record of the case in the Court

below against which order, leave to appeal has been sought

for in this petition.

5. GROUNDS:

The present petition is being filed on the following amongst other

grounds which are taken without prejudice to each other.

A. Because the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the

present case. Six persons of the accused party including

the Petitioner also sustained injuries in the incident and

just cause the complainant party filed the FIR first getting

in cahoots with the authorities and the police, they became

the victims and the accused party got arrested.

B. Because the Hon’ble High court has failed to appreciate

the evidence available on record where the police recorded

the statements of injured witnesses, who have failed to

make allegation against the petitioner for causing death of

the deceased. There was no allegation of causing any

injury to the deceased against the Petitioner. As per the

 opinion of the medical board, the cause of death is ‘shock’

brought about, as a result of Ante-Mortem liver injury,

which is sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of

nature, if this was due to being crushed under the tractor

then the whole abdomen/stomach would have had injuries

as generally they do in cases of such accidents, this clearly

highlights how the Petitioner is being framed under

concocted charges.

C. Because the Petitioner is a government servant and the sole

earner in his family. Due to these false charges is not able

to take care of his family and household financially due to

being suspended from his government job because of this

trail, hence only getting a quarter of his salary. That the

trial has been at the same stage since so long and will take

a lot of time to be fully completed and until the pendency

of the trial the petitioner deserves to be let out on bail.

D. Because the trial is at the same stage as the none of the

witnesses have appeared in the trial court since last 5

hearings and delaying the trial since a long time. The trial

court has even issued warrants against them but to no

avail. The complainants are purposefully trying to delay

the trial so that the accused petitioner remains behind bars.

E. Because the accused petitioner is a permanent resident of

Distt. Bharatpur and there is no chance of absconding of

the accused petitioner hence he is entitled for bail.

F. Because the Petitioner is behind bars since 06.10.2020 and

more than 2 years have passed by since he is in jail and

there is no case pending against the Petitioner besides this

nor does the Petitioner has any criminal antecedence,

making him entitled to bail until the pendency of the trial.

G. Because the accused Petitioner is ready and willing to

furnish bail bonds and sureties as per the direction of the

Court.

H. Because all the co-accused persons namely Tej Singh,

Ramesh Chand, Rajveer and Ors. are released on bail by

High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, hence on the

grounds of Parity the present accused Petitioner is entitled

to be released on bail as the charges framed against all the

accused persons are same and no specific role has been

assigned to the present Petitioner.

I. Because there are several decisions of the Supreme Court

and various High Courts stating that Parity is a valid

ground. In Shiv Mohan Kapoor vs State Of U.P. & Anr

 (2012) Cr. Appl 522/2012, the Supreme Court gave bail to

the accused on the ground of Parity. Not only this but in

various judgements the courts have given bail on Parity

keeping in account the position of the accused Petitioner is

exactly similar to the other accused.

J. Because in the Apex court judgement in Dataram Singh vs

The State Of Uttar Pradesh [(2018) 3 SCC 22] the

Supreme Court held that bail is the general rule and putting

a person is an exception. The court clearly stated how the

presumption is innocent until proven guilty. The court also

noticed that where there is no risk of the accused

absconding bail should be granted. The Petitioner is under

similar circumstances and should be granted bail under

consideration of this case law.

K. Because the High Court and Trial court disregarded the

fact that the witnesses of the complainant party are all their

known people or relative and even though the incident was

witnessed by various people of the village there is no

witness from the village clearly highlighting that the FIR is

a false concoction. That in the statement under section 161

Crpc none of the witnesses identified the accused

 petitioner as the person who was driving the tractor and

they acclaimed the other accused as who was driving the

tractor. In the FIR they claimed that the accused petitioner

is the one driving the tractor. That this clearly highlights

the concocted story of the complainants with different

versions.

L. That the lower courts disregarded the evidence where the

facts are disputed as in some statements the complainants

have claimed the tractor driver to be someone else but in

others they changed it to the Petitioner clearly highlighting

disputed though out facts far different from reality.

M. Because the impugned judgement is based on conjectures

and surmises, in light of the available evidence, which was

admissible yet not appreciated correctly.

1. GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF:

NIL

1. PRAYER:

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble

Court may kindly be pleased to:

 a). Grant Special Leave to Appeal against, and set aside

the impugned Judgment and final order dated

21.09.2022 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of

Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench in S.B.

Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application

No.14239/2022;

b). Pass such other order and/or orders as this Hon’ble

Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the case.

1. PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF:

NIL

FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER, AS IN

DUTY BOUND, SHALL EVER PRAY

Drawn by: Filed by:

Kartik Dabas Prabodh kumar

Advocate Advocate on Record
for the Petitioner
5/29A, First Floor, Jungpura B,
Near Jeevan Jyoti Ashram
New Delhi-110014

DRAWN ON:

FILED ON:
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO._____ OF 2022

IN THE MATTER OF:

NARAYAN SINGH …PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF RAJASTHAN …RESPONDENTS

CERTIFICATE
“Certified that Special Leave Petition is confined only to the
pleadings before the High Court, whose order is challenged and
the other documents relied upon in these proceedings. No
additional facts, documents or grounds has been taken therein or
relied upon in the Special Leave Petition. It is further certified
that the copies of the documents/Annexures attached to the
Special Leave Petition are necessary to answer the question of
law raised in the Petition or to make out grounds urged in the
Special Leave Petition for consideration of this Hon’ble Court.
This Certificate is given on the basis of the instructions given by
the Petitioner whose Affidavit is filed in support of the Special
Leave Petition.”

(Prabodh Kumar)
 APPENDIX

1. Section 147 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Punishment for rioting - Whoever is guilty of rioting, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

2. Section 148 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Rioting, armed with deadly weapon - Whoever is guilty of
rioting, being armed with a deadly weapon or with anything
which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, shall
be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
323, 343/149, 325, 325/149, 307, 307/149, 302, 302/149 of I.P.C

3. Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed
in prosecution of common object - If an offence is committed by
any member of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of the
common object of that assembly, or such as the members of that
assembly knew to be likely to be committed in prosecution of
that object, every person who, at the time of the committing of
that offence, is a member of the same assembly, is guilty of that
offence.

4. Section 447 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Punishment for criminal trespass - Whoever commits criminal
trespass shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to three months, or with
fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
5. Section 341 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:
Punishment for wrongful restraint - Whoever wrongfully
restrains any person shall be punished with simple imprisonment
for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which
may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.

6. Section 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt - Whoever, except in the
case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to
one thousand rupees, or with both.

7. Section 325 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt - Whoever,
except in the case provided for by section 335, voluntarily causes
grievous hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall
also be liable to fine.

8. Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Attempt to murder - Whoever does any act with such intention or
knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act
caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is
caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable
 either to [imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is
hereinbefore mentioned.

9. Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860:

Punishment for murder - Whoever commits murder shall be
punished with death or [imprisonment for life], and shall also be
liable to fine.