Gujarat High Court
Kalpeshbhai Motibhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 8 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19077/2016 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 19077 of 2016
==========================================================
KALPESHBHAI MOTIBHAI PATEL & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ARPIT A KAPADIA(3974) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR GAJENDRA P BAGHEL(2968) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 08/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned advocate Mr.Baghel for respondent no.2 is absent.
2. Learned APP has placed on record copy of death certificate petitioner no.1, which shows that petitioner no.1 has expired on 05.01.2019. Said death certificate is taken on record. Learned APP has also produced copy of judgment passed by learned Trial Court in Criminal Case No.3426 of 2018 arising out of selfsame FIR, where other accused are acquitted by learned Trial Court recording following reason in para 10 which reads as under (it is in Gujarati, for better understanding it is translated in English) :-
"10.Upon reviewing the entire evidence on record, it is evident that the complainant himself has admitted that Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by SATISH C. VEMULLA(HC00206) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 09 22:08:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19077/2016 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined the present complaint was filed due to an accounting dispute with Manpreet Bindra. There is no evidence adduced against the present accused. Similarly, the investigating agency has not conducted any identification parade of the accused, nor has the complainant identified the accused. Therefore, based on the facts of the complaint, there is no evidence to suggest that the present accused formed an unlawful assembly, aided each other, or played any role in the alleged incident, or that they threatened or intimidated the complainant with weapons, or issued death threats. Furthermore, as the parties have reached a private settlement and the complainant does not wish to adduce any further evidence, no additional evidence has been presented in this case. Thus, as the Prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, Issues no. 1 and 2 are answered in the negative, and in the interest of justice, the following final order is passed for Issue no. 3."
3. Role of petitioners is not on higher pedestal than role of accused who have committed offence and acquitted by learned Trial Court.
4. In view of above, there is no point in sending petitioners to trial.
5. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned FIR being C.R.No.I-1 of 2016 registered with DCB Police Station, Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by SATISH C. VEMULLA(HC00206) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 09 22:08:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19077/2016 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined Surat City as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioner no.2 herein. The application stands disposed of as abated qua petitioner no.1 Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) SATISH Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by SATISH C. VEMULLA(HC00206) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 09 22:08:37 IST 2025