Gujarat High Court
Aashish Akbarali Saiyed vs State Of Gujarat on 13 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/13752/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 13752 of 2025
==========================================================
AASHISH AKBARALI SAIYED
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. EZZAZUDDIN B HUSENI(18638) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SAQUIB S ANSARI(7152) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS VRUNDA SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 13/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
[1.0] By way of present petition under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:
"(A) THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO direct the Hon'ble District and Sessions Judge, Surendranagar to immediately and forthwith register and entertain appeal alongwith the application for condonation of delay and bail application preferred by the petitioner against judgment and order dated 25/11/2023 passed in Criminal Case No.1155 of 2017 and judgment and order dated 03/07/2024 passed in Criminal Case No.1156 of 2017 passed by the Hon'ble Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar, without insisting upon surrender pursis (Annexure- A);
(B) THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO direct the Hon'ble Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar to grant provisional bail to the petitioner to enable the petitioner to prefer appeal before the Hon'ble District and Sessions Court, Surendranagar;
(C) THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO convert the non-bailable warrant issued by the Hon'ble Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar to bailable warrant on such terms and conditions as deem fit by this Hon'ble Court;"
[2.0] Having heard learned advocate for the respective parties and Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Oct 13 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 14 03:20:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/13752/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2025 undefined perusing the record it appears that the petitioner has directly approached this Court challenging the judgment and order of conviction without resorting to the alternative statutory remedy available to the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is convicted on 03.07.2024 and petitioner has filed the present petition on 08.10.2025. Further, petitioner has directly approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without availing statutory remedy and hence, as per the law laid down by this Court in the case of Bhoomi Exim & Anr. Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. (SCR.A/12711/2023, dtd. 07.10.2023); Arun Shankar Shukla Vs. State of U.P & Ors, reported in 1999 (6) SCC 146 and Hamida Vs. Rashid alias Rasheed and Ors. reported in (2008) 1 SCC 474, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hamida (Supra) has been pleased to observe in Head-note B as under:
"B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - S.482 - Inherent powers of High Court - Scope - Limits of - Alternative remedy - Availability of - Effect - Held, has to be exercised sparingly with circumspection and in rare cases and that too to correct patent illegalities or when some miscarriage of justice is done - Practice of High Courts in entertaining petitions under S.482, when there was an effective alternative remedy available, deprecated - Ends of justice would be better served if valuable time of the Court is spent in hearing those appeals rather than entertaining petitions under S.482 CrPC at an interlocutory stage which are often filed with some oblique motive in order to circumvent the prescribed procedure, as in the instant case, or to delay the trial which enable the accused to win over the witnesses by money or muscle power or they may become disinterested in giving evidence, ultimately resulting in miscarriage of justice (paras 7, 8 and 13)"
[2.1] Another argument of the learned advocate for the petitioner is that petitioner is ready and willing to deposit 20% of the cheque amount and in this regard, the petitioner has filed an undertaking however, it is needless to say that once the petitioner is convicted and warrant under Section 418(2) of the CrPC (section 548 of the BNSS) is issued, exercise of power of suspending the sentence without filing of statutory appeal, is not permissible in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manoj Vasudev Sompura Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2024 (3) GLR 1737 and Sharad Jethalal Savla Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. in CRMA Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Oct 13 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 14 03:20:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/13752/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2025 undefined No.19862/2025 as well as the decision dated 10.02.2022 of the coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Istadev Projects Pvt. Ltd. Company Thro Maheshbhai Virabhai Patel vs. State of Gujarat [Special Criminal Application No.1704/2022].
[3.0] In view of the above decisions as well as the fact that statutory remedy is available under law, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Sec.528 of BNSS. Accordingly, present petition is dismissed in limine. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the matter. However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail appropriate statutory remedy before the appropriate Forum. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) Ajay Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Mon Oct 13 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 14 03:20:57 IST 2025