Gunvantbhai Prahladbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Gunvantbhai Prahladbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 3 April, 2025

                                                                                                           NEUTRAL CITATION




                           R/CR.MA/1436/2020                                  ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025

                                                                                                            undefined




                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                           R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
                                         FIR/ORDER) NO. 1436 of 2020

                      ==========================================================
                                               GUNVANTBHAI PRAHLADBHAI PATEL
                                                           Versus
                                                  STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
                      ==========================================================
                      Appearance:
                      MR. NIKHIL R OZA(9911) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                      NOTICE SERVED THRU CONCERNED POLICE STATION for the
                      Respondent(s) No. 3
                      MR SOHAM JOSHI APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                      ==========================================================

                        CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

                                                          Date : 03/04/2025

                                                            ORAL ORDER

Seeking quashment of the FIR being I-CR No.86 of 2019 registered with Sarkhej Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 114 and 506(2) of the IPC, learned advocate for the petitioner Mr.Oza for the petitioner would submit that plain reading of the FIR does not disclose the essential ingredients of Section 107 of the IPC which quite needed to put the allegations of offence under Section 306 of the IPC. He would further submit that according to the FIR, the petitioner and his partner have given some construction work to the deceased to be completed within particular period and if the said work is completed prior to limit decided then petitioner will pay some more amount but since the petitioner and his partners have not paid the said amount, which promoted the deceased to commit suicide. In the submission of leaned advocate for the petitioner, the contents of the FIR is insufficient to make out the offence under Section 306 of the IPC. It is further submitted that petitioner is out of India for the period between 19/03/2019 and 26/07/2019 and in support thereof the copy of passport Page 1 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined and is also enclosed showing the said fact and thus there is no proximity prior to the alleged incident which promoted the deceased to commit suicide. It is further submitted that petitioner has given huge amount which is almost completing the amount required to be paid for the construction work; yet the deceased was demanding more amount and thus considering the said facts, it is submitted that permitting the petitioner to trial would be abuse of process of law.

1.1 In support of his submissions, learned advocate for the petitioner has relied upon the serious of judgment which are as under:

1. Sanju alias Sanjay Singh Sengar vs. State of MP [2002(5) SCC 371].

2. Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh [2001 (9) SCC 618].

3. A K Choudhary & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat [2005 (3) GLH 444].

4. Kiranbhai Himmatlal Gadhavi vs. State of Gujarat rendered in CR.MA NO.13760 of 2020.

1.2 By making above submissions, learned advocate for the petitioner would submit to allow this petition and to quash the FIR impugned.

2. Though served, respondent no.3 did not remain present to contest the petition.

3. Per contra, learned APP for the respondent - State would referring the statement recorded during the investigation and part of the charge-

sheet papers submit that monetary transaction took place between the party did not yield any result in favour of the deceased which promoted him to commit suicide as he could not pay the amount to the petitioner which he borrowed to complete the construction work; within the Page 2 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined stipulated time period as decided between them. He would therefore submit that since the investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed and when prima facie material is found against the petitioner, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner to quash the FIR in question.

4. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and examining the records of the case, apt to note that in case of A K Choudhary (supra), this Court while appreciating the similar facts of the case has observed as under"

"1. Life is dear to everybody and death is painful to one and all. Should sentiments prevail or discipline for the administration of any institution ? Can sentiments be allowed to be enforced over rule of law ? Can the action or inaction or propriety of action or inaction to discharge legal obligation be said as an aid or instigation or abetment to commit suicide ? The aforesaid are the aspects which directly or indirectly arise for the consideration of this Court in the present group of petitions.

17. In view of the above, it appears that the ingredients for abetment for suicide would be satisfied only if the suicide is committed by the deceased due to direct and alarming encouragement/incitement by the accused leaving no option but to commit suicide. Further, as the action of committing suicide is also on account of great disturbance to the psychological imbalance of the deceased such incitement can be divided into two broad categories, one normally where the deceased is having sentimental tie or physical relations with the accused and second category would be where the deceased is having relations with the accused Page 3 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined in official capacity. In case of former category some times a normal quarrel or the utterance of hot exchange of words may result into psychological immediate imbalance. Consequently creating situation of depression, loss of charm in the life and if the person is unable to control sentiments of expectations, it may give temptations to the person to commit suicide, e.g., when there is relation of husband and wife, mother and son, brother and sister, sister and sister and other relations of such type, where sentimental tie is by blood or due to physical relations. In case of second category the tie is on account of official relations, where the expectations would to discharge the obligation as provided for such duty in law and to receive the considerations as provided in law. In normal circumstances, relationships by sentimental tie cannot be equated with the official relationship and the reason being the different conduct of the parties for maintenance of the relations. The former category leaves more expectations, whereas in the latter category, by and large, expectations and obligations are prescribed by law, rules and regulations. Of course, for meeting with the requirement for ingredients of abetment to suicide, the provisions of the IPC are the same, but for the purpose of examination on the aspects of abetment to commit suicide or incitement/encouragement to suicide, it may have some relevance. Since, in the present case this Court is not concerned with the matter of matter of abetment to suicide where the deceased or the accused had the relations covered in the first category, no further discussion may be required in this regard to that extent. However, in case where the allegations for abetment of suicide committed by the deceased falling in second category are concerned, the strict interpretation is called for, otherwise it may result into damaging the discipline of any institution or organization or department, Page 4 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined which may consequently result into creating a situation against national interest for which the expectation would be the strict discipline and the rule of law only and nothing else."

5. In Sharad Birdhichand Sardav vs. State of Maharashtra [1984 (4) SCC 116] on the psychological aspect of the suicide, it has been observed in paragraph 8 as under:

"8. If the evidence is viewed keeping such law in mind, we do not see any person to accept the contention advanced on behalf of the State and upset the finding of the lower Court. Simply someone comes before the Court and says that both the spouses were often quarrelling is not sufficient because that would not clearly establish the knowledge or intention relation to the crime and proximate assistance. There may be difference of opinions. If on one or another issue the spouses are often quarrelling it is the usual wear and tear of the married life, and certainly that would not lead any one to end his/her life. One would bring end of his/her life if he/she is put to the compelling or alarming circumstances with no opinion. The prosecution has, therefore, to show what was the apple of discord so as to determine about abetment. The case in general terms is not sufficient. (Emphasis supplied.) Here in this case, it is not made clear as to what was the subject of quarrels on the day of the incident, what was the issue, who initiated the quarrel, in what context both were quarrelling, and who was at fault for the quarrel. With regard to the past quarrels also it is ambiguously and in general terms alleged and stated that both were often quarreling, but it is not made clear in what context, and who was at fault? The party at fault if ultimately facing frustration of his/her plan goes to the extreme, i.e. Suicide the opposite party Page 5 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined cannot be blamed and held liable. In different words, if extremity is one's own creation, and the opponent is blamed, it would amount to roguery supplants justice. (Emphasis supplied.) Nothing can be inferred or assumed for or against the party or the Court cannot jump to the conclusion that husband is always at fault, and wife is the victim of the wickedness of the husband. As made clear by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Niharbala Banerjee (supra), there is also no evidence about the knowledge and intention relating to the crime and proximate assistance. It is pertinent to note that the Calcutta High Court has held to which we agree that merely on the fact that the husband was not treating the Wife properly and was treating her with cruelty will not be sufficient to establish the abetment. (Emphasis supplied) In this case, even if on the basis of the evidence of the abovereferred witnesses it is assumed that respondent was often quarrelling with the deceased, that will not amount to abetment for committing suicide; it might be owing to abovequoted psychological factors and symptoms taking shape independent of abetment. (Emphasis supplied.)"

7. In background of the above binding precedent of law, I may refer to Section 107 of IPC as under:

"107. Abetment of a thing.--A person abets the doing of a thing, who-- First.--Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly.

--Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.--Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing."

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined

8. In order to prove offence under Section 306 of IPC, prosecution was required to establish the necessary ingredients of Section 107 of IPC which establishes abetment of things. If a person instigate a person to do anything, one or more than one person conspire for doing particular thing to any person and if any act or illegal omission takes place pursuant to such conspiracy and thirdly, intentionally aid a person by an act or illegal omission for doing that thing, then it can be said that person has abetted of things. In order to establish offence under Section 306, the prosecution needs to prove instigation or goading, intentionally aiding person to do any act or illegal omission and also such act should be within the proximate of committing suicide.

9. Now, if the FIR and chage-sheet papers are seen at its face value, it reveals that the petitioner and his partners have assigned some construction work to the deceased at particular rate with an oral promise that if the work is completed prior to the fixed period then they will pay him some more amount. Accordingly the deceased carried out the construction work but as per the FIR the petitioner and other persons have not made any payment and consequently deceased was unable to make payment to the labourers. At this stage, learned advocate for the petitioner dispute the fact that construction work is completed within the stipulated time period because as per page 498-A of the petition, the petitioner was required to carry out the construction work with some other agency as the deceased did not complete the same. Thus, taking the FIR at its face value, no such ingredients as stated in Section 107 of the IPC is fulfilled to make out the offence under Section 306 of the IPC. To be noted that initially the police registered the accidental death entry and thereafter the FIR was also registered but no such typed copy of suicide note was found by the police. However, the wife of the deceased after deliberation with the relatives tendered the typed copy of the suicide note to the police and Page 7 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined thus it also creates suspicion. Be that as it may, even if the suicide note is taken on record as gospel truth, it does not reveal essential ingredients to make the offence under Section 306 of the IPC.

10. In Mohit Singhal and another vs. State of Uttarakhand - 2024 (1) SCC 417 the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under :

"7. The suicide note records that the third respondent had borrowed a sum of Rs.60,000/-. According to the deceased, he had paid more than half of the amount to Sandeep. The suicide note records that as he could not pay the rest of the money, the first appellant came to his house and started abusing him. He stated that the first appellant had assaulted him, and therefore, he complained to the police. He further noted that the business of giving money on interest was prospering. He stated that the third respondent is not a prudent woman, and due to her habit of intoxication and due to her conduct, she got trapped in this. In the suicide note, it is further stated that the first appellant has made his life a hell.

8. According to the complaint of the third respondent, the incident in her shop of the first appellant threatening and assaulting her and her husband was on 15th June 2017. After that, notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was issued by Sandeep to the deceased on 27th June 2017. The suicide note was written three days after that, on 30th June 2017. The deceased committed suicide three days thereafter. Neither in the complaint of the third respondent nor in the suicide note, it is alleged that after 15th June 2017, the appellants or Sandeep either met or spoke to the third respondent and her deceased husband. Section 306 of the IPC makes abetment to commit suicide as an offence. Section 107 of the IPC, which defines the abetment of a thing, reads thus:

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined "Section 107 -- Abetment of a thing.- A person abets the doing of a thing, who-- First.--Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly.--Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.-- Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.

Explanation 1.--A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing." (underline supplied)

9. In the facts of the case, secondly and thirdly in Section 107, will have no application. Hence, the question is whether the appellants instigated the deceased to commit suicide. To attract the first clause, there must be instigation in some form on the part of the accused to cause the deceased to commit suicide. Hence, the accused must have mens rea to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. The act of instigation must be of such intensity that it is intended to push the deceased to such a position under which he or she has no choice but to commit suicide. Such instigation must be in close proximity to the act of committing suicide.

10. In the present case, taking the complaint of the third respondent and the contents of the suicide note as correct, it is impossible to conclude that the appellants instigated the deceased to commit suicide by demanding the payment of the amount borrowed by the third respondent from her husband by using abusive language and by assaulting him by a belt for that purpose. The said incident allegedly happened more than two weeks before the date of suicide.

There is no allegation that any act was done by the appellants in the close proximity to the date of suicide. By no stretch of the imagination, the alleged acts of the Page 9 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined appellants can amount to instigation to commit suicide. The deceased has blamed the third respondent for landing in trouble due to her bad habits."

11. The fact in the judgment of Mohit Singhal (supra) is quite similar to the facts of the present case. It is quite impossible to conclude that because the petitioner has asked and demanded back money borrowed by the deceased has instigated the deceased to commit the suicide.

12. With profit, I may refer to the judgment of Madan Mohan Singh (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under :

"8. It is on this that Shri Tulsi contended that all this is absolutely absurd. If a person writes a suicide note on 4.2.2008, he had no business to send the suicide note to High Court and keep a copy thereof in the house. Learned Senior Counsel said that even if all this is accepted as it is, there is nothing to suggest that the appellant has committed any offence or that any offence could be spelt out from the said suicide note or the FIR much less offence under Sections 306 and 294, IPC. We are convinced that there is absolutely nothing in this suicide note or the FIR which would even distantly be viewed as an offence much less under Section 306, IPC. We could not find anything in the FIR or in the so-called suicide note which could be suggested as abetment to commit suicide. In such matters there must be an allegation that the accused had instigated the deceased to commit suicide or secondly, had engaged with some other person in a conspiracy and lastly, that the accused had in any way aided any act or illegal omission to bring about the suicide. In spite of our best efforts and microscopic examination of the suicide note and the FIR, all that we find is that the suicide note is a rhetoric document in the nature of a departmental complaint. It also suggests some mental imbalance on the part of the deceased which he himself describes as depression. In the so-called suicide note, it cannot be said that the accused ever intended that Page 10 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined the driver under him should commit suicide or should end his life and did anything in that behalf. Even if it is accepted that the accused changed the duty of the driver or that the accused asked him not to take the keys of the car and to keep the keys of the car in the office itself, it does not mean that the accused intended or knew that the driver should commit suicide because of this. In order to bring out an offence under Section 306, IPC specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107, IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring out the suicide of the concerned person as a result of that abetment is required. The intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this particular offence under Section 306, IPC. We are of the clear opinion that there is no question of there being any material for offence under Section 306, IPC either in the FIR or in the so-called suicide note.

9. It is absurd to even think that a superior officer like the appellant would intend to bring about suicide of his driver and, therefore, abet the offence. In fact, there is no nexus between the so called suicide (if at all it is one for which also there is no material on record) and any of the alleged acts on the part of the appellant. There is no proximity either. In the prosecution under Section 306, IPC, much more material is required. The Courts have to be extremely careful as the main person is not available for cross- examination by the appellant/accused. Unless, therefore, there is specific allegation and material of definite nature (not imaginary or inferential one), it would be hazardous to ask the appellant/accused to face the trial. A criminal trial is not exactly a pleasant experience. The person like the appellant in present case who is serving in a responsible post would certainly suffer great prejudice, were he to face prosecution on absurd allegations of irrelevant nature. In the similar circumstances, as reported in Netai Dutta Vs. State of W.B. [2005 (2) SCC 659], this Court had quashed the proceedings initiated against the accused.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined

10. As regards the suicide note, which is a document of about 15 pages, all that we can say is that it is an anguish expressed by the driver who felt that his boss (the accused) had wronged him. The suicide note and the FIR do not impress us at all. They cannot be depicted as expressing anything intentional on the part of the accused that the deceased might commit suicide. If the prosecutions are allowed to continue on such basis, it will be difficult for every superior officer even to work.

11. It was tried to be contended by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that at this stage, we should not go into the merits of the FIR or the said suicide note. It is trite law now that where there is some material alleged in the FIR, then such FIR and the ensuing proceedings should not be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is for this reason that we very closely examined the FIR to see whether it amounts to a proper complaint for the offence under Sections 306 and 294(b) IPC. Insofar as Section 294(b) IPC is concerned, we could not find a single word in the FIR or even in the so- called suicide note. Insofar as Section 306 IPC is concerned, even at the cost of repetition, we may say that merely because a person had a grudge against his superior officer and committed suicide on account of that grudge, even honestly feeling that he was wronged, it would still not be a proper allegation for basing the charge under Section 306 IPC. It will still fall short of a proper allegation. It would have to be objectively seen whether the allegations made could reasonably be viewed as proper allegations against the appellant/accused to the effect that he had intended or engineered the suicide of the concerned person by his acts, words etc. When we put the present FIR on this test, it falls short. We have already explained that the baseless and irrelevant allegations could not be used as a basis for prosecution for a serious offence under Section 306 IPC. Similarly, we have already considered Section 294 (b) IPC also. We have not been able to find anything. Under such circumstances, where the FIR itself does not have any material or is not capable Page 12 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined of being viewed as having material for offence under Sections 306 and 294(b) IPC, as per the law laid down by this Court in State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors. [1992 Suppl. 1 SCC 335], it would be only proper to quash the FIR and the further proceedings."

13. From the record, it also appears that petitioner was out of India for the period between 19/03/2019 and 26/07/2019 and in support thereof the copy of passport and is also enclosed showing the said fact and thus there is no proximity prior to the alleged incident which promoted the deceased to commit suicide. Bare reading of the FIR indicates that no allegations are levelled against the petitioner that he has instigated the deceased to commit suicide.

14. Recently, in case of R. Shashirekha vs State Of Karnataka [2025 INSC 402] the Hon'ble Apex Court after referring earlier decision in paragraph 13 has held thus:

"13. Assuming that the allegations are true, even otherwise, the case under Section 306 of IPC would not be made out. Recently, this Court in a case of Prakash and Others v. State of Maharashtra and Another1 in which one of us (Gavai, J.) was a Member has considered all the earlier judgments with regard to Section 306 of IPC. After referring to the earlier judgments, this Court has observed thus:

"31. In the case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar (supra), this Court, under similar circumstances, had quashed the chargesheet under Section 306 of the IPC against the accused- appellant. A factor that had weighed with the Court in the said case was that there was a time gap of 48 hours being the alleged instigation and the commission of suicide. This Court held that the deceased was a victim of his own conduct, unconnected with the quarrel that had ensued between Page 13 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined him and the appellant, 48 hours prior to the commission of his suicide.

32. In the case at hand, taking the allegations in the FIR at face value, the incident at the mahalokadalat had occurred on 17th February 2015, while the deceased had committed suicide on 20th March 2015.

There is a clear gap of over a month between the incident at the mahalokadalat and the commission of suicide. We therefore find that the courts below have erroneously accepted the prosecution story that the act of suicide by the deceased was a direct result of the words uttered by the appellants at the mahalokadalat. ................

34. .......The cardinal principle of the subject-matter at hand is that there must be a close proximity between the positive act of instigation by the accused person and the commission of suicide by the victim. The close proximity should be such as to 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3835 : 2024 INSC 1020 create a clear nexus between the act of instigation and the act of suicide. As was held in the case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar (supra), if the deceased had taken the words of the appellants seriously, a time gap between the two incidents would have given enough time to the deceased to think over and reflect on the matter. As such, a gap of over a month would be sufficient time to dissolve the nexus or the proximate link between the two acts."

15. In the case of State of Haryana Vs. B.Bhajanlal & ors., AIR 1992 SC 604, the Hon'ble Apex Court summed up the proposition of law, which reads as under:-

"(1) Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined (2) Where the allegations ins the F.I.R. and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under S.156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of S.155(2) of the code.

(3) Where, the uncontroverted allegations made in the F.I.R. or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same donot disclose the commission of any offence and make out the case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under S.155(2) of the Code.

(5) Whether, the allegations made in the F.I.R. or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(6) Where, there is an express legal bare engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) toi the institution and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

16. The FIR accepted in its entirety as correct do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out any case against the present petitioner. The allegations made in the F.I.R. are so absurd and inherently Page 15 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1436/2020 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused and the evidence collected in support of the FIR do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out the case against the accused.

17. Resultantly, while applying finding of Hon'ble Supreme Court at Sr. No.1, 3, 5 and 7 of Bhajan Lal's case, by allowing the present petition, the FIR being I-CR No.86 of 2019 registered with Sarkhej Police Station and further proceedings arising out of the said FIR is hereby quashed qua the petitioner. Rule is made absolute.

(J. C. DOSHI,J) sompura Page 16 of 16 Uploaded by SOMPURA MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA(HC00189) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:54:09 IST 2025