Gujarat High Court
Gulammuhammad S/O ... vs State Of Gujarat on 11 August, 2023
Bench: M. R. Mengdey
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4715/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 4715 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
==========================================================
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 ?
==========================================================
GULAMMUHAMMAD S/O GULAMMOSNUDDIN DAROGA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MM SAIYED(1806) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. VRUNDA C. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 11/08/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By filing the present Application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 the Applicant - Original Accused has prayed for
quashing and setting aside the FIR being I-CR No. 2 of 2014 registered with
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4715/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2023
undefined
DCB Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 186,
279, 427 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. M.M.Saiyed for the Applicant. He
submitted that the present Applicant has been arraigned as Accused in the FIR
in question only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused and, except the
statement of the co-accused, there is no other material to connect the present
Applicant with the offence in question. He further submitted that, on the same
set of facts, two FIRs have been registered. First FIR is registered as III-CR
No. 5100 of 2014 with DCB Police Station, Surat City for the offence
punishable under Sections 66(1) (B), 65(E)(A), 116(B), 81, 98, 99 of the
Prohibition Act, whereas, the present FIR has been lodged for the offences
mentioned herein above. He submitted that the Applicant was not present at
the time when the alleged incident had taken place. He further submitted that
the Sessions Court, Surat vide its judgment and order dated 12.3.2020 passed in
Sessions Case No. 136 of 2014 has acquitted the other co-accused in the
present offences. He therefore submitted to allow the present Application and
quash and set aside the FIR in question qua the present Applicant.
3. The Application is opposed by learned APP Ms. Vrunda C. Shah.
4. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. As per
the case of the prosecution, on 28.1.2014, the first informant and the other staff
members of DCB Police Station had received a secret information as regards
illegal transport of liquor and, on the basis of the said secret information, the
police staff of DCB Police Station was deployed for watch at Udhna Cross
Roads at around 4:45 AM. The accused persons, who were travelling in
Hundai Verna Car bearing Registration No. GJ-15-PR-6381, were carrying
foreign liquor in the car and were to deliver the same to their customers. When
the police authority attempted to intercept the said car, the Driver of the Car
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4715/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2023
undefined
tried to run the car over the police personnel and that is how the present offence
was registered against the accused persons, including the present Applicant.
The Applicant was shown to be absconding during the course of investigation.
He has filed the present Application, wherein, this Court vide orde dated
7.4.2014 had granted interim relief in terms of paragraph 6(B) as prayed in the
the Memo of Application in favour of the Applicant. In the interragnum, the
investigation qua the other co-accused was conducted and chargesheet was also
filed. Subsequently, the Trial was conducted against them vide Sessions Case
No. 136 of 2014 and the learned Sessions Judge vide judgment and order dated
12.3.2020 was pleased to acquit the other co-accused persons from the offences
alleged in the present FIR. A copy of the said judgment and order is produced
on record.
5. Learned APP is not in a position to contradict the aforesaid facts. It is
also required to be noted that initially on the same set of facts, the FIR being
III-CR No. 5100 of 2014 was registered with DCB Police Station, Surat City
for the offence punishable under the Prohibition Act, though, in the said FIR,
the present incident is also referred to, no offence punishable under Section 307
of IPC was added to the FIR. Subsequently, the present FIR has been lodged
invoking the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and other allied
offences for the very same incident. The learned Sessions Judge in the above
referred judgment has clearly held that except the statements of the accused
recorded on the scene of occurrence, there is no other material available on
record indicating the fact that the instructions were given to them to run the car
over the police personnel.
6. Considering the aforesaid aspects, the present Application deserves to be
allowed and hence, the same is hereby allowed. the FIR being I-CR No. 2 of
2014 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable
under Sections 307, 186, 279, 427 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and all
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/4715/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/08/2023
undefined
other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed and set
aside so far as it relates to the present Applicant. Rule is made absolute.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
J.N.W
