Dharmendrasinh Babubhai Mori vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Dharmendrasinh Babubhai Mori vs State Of Gujarat on 7 August, 2025

                                                                                                         NEUTRAL CITATION




                             R/CR.RA/598/2020                              ORDER DATED: 07/08/2025

                                                                                                          undefined




                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                         R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR MUDDAMAL) NO. 598 of
                                                   2020

                       ==========================================================
                                                DHARMENDRASINH BABUBHAI MORI
                                                           Versus
                                                     STATE OF GUJARAT
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR MJ MEHTA(5797) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MR NIRAD D BUCH(4000) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MR. NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                       ==========================================================

                            CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA

                                                       Date : 07/08/2025

                                                        ORAL ORDER

1. Leave to amend is granted. Learned advocate appearing for the applicant is permitted to carry out necessary amendment in the revision application. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent - State.

3. The present revision application has been preferred by the applicant - original accused under Section 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C. for short) directing against the order passed by learned Special Judge (ACB) Tapi at Vyara in Criminal Misc. Application Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by AMAR SINGH(HC01081) on Thu Aug 07 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 22:07:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/598/2020 ORDER DATED: 07/08/2025 undefined No. 85 of 2016 dated 07.06.2016 rejecting the application of the applicant seeking for temporary custody of his mobile phone, pending the trial.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Buch for the applicant submitted that the present applicant - accused has been arraigned as an accused in pursuance to the FIR being I-C.R. No.5 of 2015 registered before Vyara ACB Police Station, District Tapi for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 10, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on 01.10.2015. It is submitted that the pursuant to the said FIR, a black colour apple mobile phone of the applicant was seized. Further, it is submitted that the IMEI number of the same was 013738001316488 and due to typographical mistake, in the application, some other IMEI number was mentioned. It is further submitted that so far as the order passed by the trial Court is concerned, at the relevant point of time, investigation was going on, but now the investigation is over and chargesheet has also been filed. Learned advocate has submitted that the applicant is in need of his mobile phone and custody of the mobile phone be granted to him pending the present ACB case.

5. Per contra, learned APP has submitted that the Investigating Officer has submitted a report and as per the report, during the trial, the mobile phone is required to be produced and hence, the present application may not be granted.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/598/2020 ORDER DATED: 07/08/2025 undefined

6. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned advocate for the parties, perusing the order passed by learned trial Court, it appears that the trial Court has denied to handover the custody of the mobile phone of the applicant as at the relevant point of time, the investigation was going on. The said impugned order has been passed in the year 2016, and now the investigation is over and chargesheet has also been filed and hence, this Court is of the opinion that the order passed by the trial Court requires interference. Further, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai versus State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283, the present application requires consideration and deserves to be allowed.

7. In view of the above, the present application is allowed. The black colour mobile I-phone bearing serial No.C35JPGUZDTWD and IMEI No.013738001316488, which was seized pursuant to the FIR being I-C.R. No.5 of 2015 registered before Vyara ACB Police Station, District Tapi for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 10, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on 01.10.2015, it is directed that temporary custody of the said mobile phone be given to the present applicant till the final disposal of the said ACB Case on following conditions:

(i) The present applicant shall give surety of 1.5 times Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by AMAR SINGH(HC01081) on Thu Aug 07 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 22:07:20 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/598/2020 ORDER DATED: 07/08/2025 undefined before the Special ACB Sessions Court;

(ii) The applicant shall produce the same in the Court as and when it is required;

(iii) The applicant shall not sell the said mobile phone till the final disposal of the abovementioned ACB Case;

8. With the above directions, the present application stands allowed. Rule is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted.

(L. S. PIRZADA, J) AMAR SINGH Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by AMAR SINGH(HC01081) on Thu Aug 07 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 07 22:07:20 IST 2025