Gujarat High Court
Mahamad Hamza @ Muniyo @ Amit Patel ... vs State Of Gujarat on 27 April, 2022
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/18402/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/04/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18402 of 2020
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18403 of 2020
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
MAHAMAD HAMZA @ MUNIYO @ AMIT PATEL S/O. RIYAZBHAI KHOKHAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR EE SAIYED(725) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SIKANDER SAIYED(3458) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS M D MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED THRU CONCERNED POLICE STN for the Respondent(s)
No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 27/04/2022
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Sikander Saiyed for the applicant and
learned APP Ms. M.D. for the respondent-State in both the applications.
R/CR.MA/18402/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/04/2022
2. Both the applications impugn two separate FIRs i.e. Criminal Misc.
Application No. 18402 of 2020 impugns FIR being C.R. No.
11213021200944 of 2020 registered with Jasdan Police Station, District
Rajkot Rural, on 28.09.2020, for the offences punishable under Sections 406,
420, 120B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas Criminal Misc.
Application No. 18403 of 2020 impugns FIR being C.R. No.
11193004201238 of 2020 registered with Amreli Rural Police Station,
District Amreli, on 30.09.2020, for the offences punishable under Sections
406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It appears that both the FIRs, were with regard to a transaction by the
principal accused, and whereas the same modus operandi had been used by
the principal accused and whereas while the present applicant was not
named as accused in the FIRs, during the course of investigation, the name
of the present applicant had been revealed as an accused. It also appears
that since there was no interim relief in both the matters, the Investigating
Officers concerned had filed charge-sheets and whereas the applicant has
been shown as accused No.3 in both the charge-sheets.
4. This Courts notes that vide order dated 04.03.2022, more particularly
considering the submissions of learned Advocate for the applicant, a
specific query had been raised by this Court and whereas in that regard
learned APP Ms. Mehta had submitted that there was no material collected
by the Investigating Officers concerned which would show the involvement
of the present applicant with regard to the offences as alleged in the FIRs. It
further appears that after order dated 04.03.2022, this Court had permitted
draft amendment circulated by the learned Advocate for the applicant in
both the applications, and more particularly with regard to bring the charge-
sheets papers on record and where as Rule was issued upon the respondent
No.2 and though it appears that copy of Rule has been served upon the
original complainants, they have not remained present before this Court.
R/CR.MA/18402/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/04/2022
This Court had raised a query to the learned APP Ms. Mehta as to whether
even in the charge-sheets papers, any role could be shown as having been
played by the present applicant, in support of the offences as alleged in the
FIRs and whereas learned APP, upon instructions from the Investigating
Officers concerned, would submit that except working on daily wages on
behalf of the principal accused, there is no other role which could be
attributed to the present applicant.
5. Learned Advocate Mr. Sikander Saiyed on behalf of the applicant has
also taken this Court through the charge-sheets papers and whereas it
appears that there is no material, collected in investigation, which would
show any involvement of the present applicant, in the offences alleged in
the FIRs in question.
6. Having regard to the same, more particularly considering instance No.
(3) of Para 102 of judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of State of
Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and others, reported in 1992 Supp. (1)
SCC 335, where even the uncotroverted allegations made in the FIR and
investigation into such uncotroverted allegations, not revealing, any
involvement of the applicant, in the considered opinion of this Court,
present applications deserve consideration.
7. Having regard to the same, the impugned FIR being C.R. No.
11213021200944 of 2020 registered with Jasdan Police Station, District
Rajkot Rural, which is challenged in Criminal Misc. Application No. 18402
of 2020, as well as all further proceedings arising therefrom including the
Criminal Case No. 1227 of 2020 pending before the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Rakot, are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicant only,
and the impugned FIR being C.R. No. 11193004201238 of 2020 registered
with Amreli Rural Police Station, District Amreli, which is challenged in
Criminal Misc. Application No. 18403 of 2020, as well as all further
R/CR.MA/18402/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/04/2022
proceedings arising therefrom including the Criminal Case No. 982 of 2020
pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amreli, are hereby
quashed and set aside qua the applicant only.
8. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
BDSONGARA
