Gujarat High Court
Ashraf Rafiqbapu Qadri vs State Of Gujarat on 10 March, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/22821/2017 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 22821 of 2017
==========================================================
ASHRAF RAFIQBAPU QADRI & 4 other(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. KRUTI M SHAH(2428) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR.DARSHAN A. DAVE(7921) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR LB DABHI APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 10/03/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Ms. Kruti Shah, Mr. Darshan A. Dave and Mr. L.B. Dabhi,
learned APP for the respective parties.
2. By this application, the applicants have prayed for quashing of the
FIR registered at Karanj Police Station, Ahmedabad City being C.R.
No.I-70/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 376D, 143,
147, 149, 506(2), 294B and 507 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and
Section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5a) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 25(1)
(b)(f) of the Arms Act, 1959 and also under Section 135(1) of the Gujarat
Police Act, 1951.
3. Referring to the order of the co-accused passed in Criminal Misc.
Application No. 25771 of 2017, learned counsel Ms. Kruti M. Shah
would submit that, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, after examining
R/CR.MA/22821/2017 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2023
the allegations leveled in the FIR, quashed the proceedings against co-
accused Pappu @ Rohit Madhubhai Solanki and others. She would
further submit that, while quashing the FIR, the co-ordinate Bench, taking
into consideration the guidelines laid down in the case of State of
Hariyana Vs. Bhajanlal (AIR 1992 SC 604), held that, the proceedings
is manifestly attended with malafide and/or maliciously instituted with an
ulterior motive for wracking vengeance on the accused.
4. In such circumstances, learned counsel Ms. Shah submitted that,
the case of the present applicants is covered by the judgment of the co-
ordinate Bench and therefore, case is made out for exercising inherent
powers of this Court to prevent the misuse of the process of law and
court.
5. Mr. L.B. Dabhi, learned APP and Mr. Darshan A. Dave, learned
advocate for respondent no. 2 vehemently opposed the application and
contended that, the role of present applicants are totally different and
cannot be put at par with the co-accused. Thus, therefore, it is prayed that
no case is made out for exercising inherent powers of this Court.
6. Before adverting to the submissions made by learned counsel for
the respective parties, it is relevant to refer paras, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the
order dated 12.02.2019 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
Criminal Misc. Application No. 25771 of 2017:
"11. A close scrutiny of the contents of the FIR, reveal that
the narration of the entire incident appears to be highly
improbable and dubious. It appears that the present
complainant is in habit of making same allegations against
the various persons. One of which is reflected in the
judgment and order dated 24.07.2017 passed in Criminal
R/CR.MA/22821/2017 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2023
Misc. Application No.16178 of 2017 wherein same
allegations are made against one Ashraf Rafikbapu Kadri.
This Court while exercising the powers under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, has granted regular bail to
the concerned accused. It appears that there are various
offences registered against the present respondent No.2 also.
12. This Court has also perused the contents of the report
filed by the Investigating Officer. A threadbare analysis of
the report indicates that the respondent No.2 has lodged the
present FIR with some oblique motive as the investigation
reveals that the allegations leveled therein are in fact not
supported by any evidence and appear to be inconceivable.
There are no eye witnesses available and the location of her
mobile phone also indicates that she was not present at the
place where the alleged incident has occurred and in fact,
her mobile location was found at various places except the
place of incident as alleged.
13. Thus, in light of the report of the Investigating Officer as
well as looking to the antecedents of the respondent No.2,
this Court is of the opinion that the impugned FIR deserves
to be quashed and set aside since the continuous of the
prosecution would amount to the abuse of process of law.
This is a case where the present case would be covered
under the parameters laid down by the Apex Court in the
case of Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors (supra). The further
continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the
impugned F.I.R. against the original accused would be
unnecessary harassment to the applicant and would amount
to abuse of process of law and court and hence, to secure the
ends of justice, the impugned F.I.R. is required to be
quashed in exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1974.
14. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the present
application is allowed. Impugned F.I.R. being C.R. No.I-
70/2017 registered at Karjan Police Station, Ahmedabad
City as well as all other consequential proceedings arising
out of the aforesaid F.I.R are hereby quashed and set
aside."
R/CR.MA/22821/2017 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2023
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case
and upon perusal of the allegations in the FIR and material placed on
record, it is not in dispute that the co-accused nos. 1 to 7 had filed
quashing petition (SCR.A No. 25771 of 2017), wherein, after hearing the
parties, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court quashed the FIR and
consequential proceedings. The allegations leveled against the present
applicants and co-accused are similar in nature. The Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court, held that the respondent no. 2 lodged the questioned FIR
with some oblique motive, as the victim respondent no. 2 was not present
at the place and no evidence found by the investigating officer against the
accused. In such circumstances, this Court of the considered opinion that,
considering the role attributable to present applicants herein, the case is
covered by the order of Co-ordinate Bench and therefore, there is no need
to decide the issue whether the averments made in the complaint
disclosed the ingredients necessary to constitute an offences.
8. For the foregoing reasons, the present application is allowed to
aforesaid extent. The impugned F.I.R. being C.R. No.I-70/2017 registered
at Karanj Police Station, Ahmedabad City and consequential proceedings
therefrom are hereby quashed and set aside. Direct service permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
P.S. JOSHI
