Advocate Rekha Tahlani, a practicing advocate in Rajasthan approached the Supreme Court of India against an order passed by the Rajasthan High Court dismissing her Misc. Petition. The Supreme Court passed an order in this regard to list the case before a Hindi-knowing Bench on 28.02.2022.

The case is listed before the Supreme Court on Friday before the bench of HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI and MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN where she would be appearing in person.

Earlier the Rajasthan High Court had passed the order against her which has been challenged by her before the Apex Court. Interestingly, the High Court also rendered its judgment in Hindi. The translation of the order is as under:-

"Undisputedly in this case the FR has been filed on the report of the appellant-complainant. Thereafter, the complainant filed a complaint, in which the trial court ordered the framing of charges against the original revision petitioner (respondent accused) under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, which he challenged through Revision Petition, which is still pending in court and it is under consideration.

Pending the aforesaid Revision, the complainant filed an application before the Revisional Court with a newspaper clipping dated 18.04.2017, regarding false statements made by the respondent-accused in the contempt petition and a complaint made against him by a woman and a Sarpanch. Submitted such documents. No prayer was made in the pleadings to bring these documents on record, rather they were prayed to be brought on record during the course of the argument. By the impugned order passed by the learned Revision Court- the plea of ​​the plaintiff was rejected saying that the decision of revision has to be made on the basis of the records of the respective cases. The documents submitted above by the complainant are neither relevant nor necessary nor necessary for the disposal of deision. A petition was filed against this order in which further proceedings were stayed by issuing an ex parte interim stay order in his favour.

Revision Petition against the order of the charge-framing can be decided only on the basis of the record of the case pending before the trial court. Documents submitted by any party during revision are not relevant and necessary. Apart from the above, the complainant has produced the documents in question before the Revision Court to show that the respondent-accused-Revisioner has no respect for women, but first of all these documents are not admissible at the stage. On the other hand, the character of the accused in criminal proceedings is not relevant. In such a situation, the learned vigilance court has committed no error in rejecting the petition of the plaintiff.

From the material available on the file it is revealed that in the year 2012 this court ordered disposal of the original criminal case in six months, but even after 9 years it has not been disposed of, rather the file is pending at the stage of charge itself. The Revision against the accused has also been pending for years, so it is directed that the revision will be disposed of within a maximum period of two months as soon as the judgment copy is received by the Revisional court."