Naran Bharu Sheda (Gadhvi) vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 7390 Guj

                                                                                   NEUTRAL CITATION




    R/CR.MA/14602/2014                             JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2023

                                                                                    undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

      R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
                    FIR/ORDER) NO. 14602 of 2014


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER

==========================================================

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 ?

==========================================================
                   NARAN BHARU SHEDA (GADHVI) & 1 other(s)
                                 Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SIRAJ R GORI(2298) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR HARSHADRAY A DAVE(3461) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

    CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER

                               Date : 06/10/2023

                              ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This is an application filed by the present applicants

praying to quash and set aside the FIR being II-

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/14602/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2023

undefined

C.R.No.306 of 2016 registered with Mundra Police

Station, West Kutch for the offence punishable under

Section 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and

Provisions of Special Economic Zone Act, 2005 ('the SEZ

Act' hereinafter) and Special Economic Zone, Rules.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that on 03.05.2015, the

complainant and one Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav were on the

duty from 07:00a.m. in the morning. They were on the

duty near to the Aadani Power Plant. On the way of

Mundra Adani Port from Adani Power Plant on the main

road, there is a Kachcha Road leading towards the Creek.

It is averred from the FIR that Kachcha Road lead to SEZ

area therefore, barricades have been installed to restrict

the movement of the public. So far as the fishermen are

concerned, they were issued the passes for entering into

the said area. It is alleged in the FIR that around

11:00a.m. two persons came there on the bike having

sticks on their hands. When the inquiry was made by the

complainant about where they want to go, both the

persons had informed to remove the barricades and

informed that they want to enter inside. On asking their

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/14602/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2023

undefined

name, they got angry and started abusing complainant

and his colleague, who were present at the place of

offence. Thereafter, they had raised their hands with the

sticks to beat them and threatened them if, the

complainant will try to stop them, they would be killed

him, thereafter they went inside on their bike. After half

an hour, both the persons came back on their bike and

taking photographs from their mobiles and started

abusing to the complainant. When their names were

asked. Again, they had informed that one is Naran

Gadhavi and another is Ram Gadhavi of village Zarpara.

At that point of time, the other peoples gathered there

however, both the accused persons had started abusing

the peoples gathered and raised their hands with sticks

to beat them. It is further alleged that one of the person

who was present, namely, Mahipalsinh was also abused

and threatened by the applicants-original accused and

informed that if they would not give the place they would

be killed them. With the aforesaid allegations, the FIR

came to be lodged which is impugned before this Court.

During the pendency of the application, it is informed

that charge-sheet is filed on 02.08.2014 which was

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/14602/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2023

undefined

numbered as Criminal Case No.1058 of 2014. It is further

informed that after filing of the charge-sheet, no trial has

been proceeded as there was a stay granted by this

Court vide order dated 25.09.2019.

3. Heard the learned advocate Mr.Siraj Gori for the

applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

Mr.Bhargav Pandya for respondent No.1 State, learned

advocate Mr.Harshadray Dave for respondent No.2.

4. It is contended by the learned advocate Mr.Siraj Gori for

the applicants that both the young boys were falsely

implicated in the FIR and the allegations which are made

in the FIR that they had on their bike having stick on their

hands is not believable as driver of the bike would not be

able to hold the stick on his hand as he has to run the

bike. Learned advocate Mr.Gori further submits that the

way where the barricades were installed i.e. the way of

temple of Baradi Mata where the applicants want to go.

Due to the barricades, they were restricted. However,

subsequently they went to the temple and thereafter

returned, but the incident mentioned in the FIR had never

occurred.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/14602/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2023

undefined

4.1. Learned advocate Mr.Gori further submits that both

the young boys, who are the applicants before this

Court are the residents of small village Zarpara. The

allegation which was made in the FIR is with regard to

the threatening to the complainant and his colleagues

who were present is without any basis as if they are

having stick on their hands they must have assaulted

with that. However, on bare reading of the FIR there is

no such allegation made against the applicants.

4.2. Learned advocate Mr.Gori further relies on the

photographs, which are the part of the application,

wherein it transpires that around 10 to 15 persons

gathered and these two boys were on the middle of

the road, which also indicates that there was no any

incident which is mentioned in the FIR ever occurred.

4.3. Learned advocate Mr.Gori further submits that

ingredients of Section 503 of the Indian Penal Code is

also missing from the complaint as there was no any

injury which was caused to the complainant or any

other person by the applicants.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/14602/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2023

undefined

4.4. In view of above submissions, learned advocate

Mr.Gori prays to allow this application and to quash

the impugned FIR.

5. On the other hands, learned advocate Mr.Harshadray

Dave for the respondent No.2 submits that as the FIR was

culminated in to the charge-sheet, at this stage, no

interference is required as ultimately it is for the trial

Court to appreciate the evidence and to render judgment.

Learned advocate Mr.Dave further submits that the FIR

which was alleged to have been filed on the same day

and there is no any reason for any false implication of the

applicants in the alleged FIR.

5.1. In view of above, learned advocate Mr.Dave submits

that not to interfere with the proceedings and prays to

dismiss the application.

6. Learned APP Mr.Bhargav Pandya submits that during the

investigation, the remand was sought, however no any

sticks nor the bike was recovered. The statements of the

eye witnesses were recorded, which reveal that offence is

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/14602/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2023

undefined

committed. Learned APP further submits that as the

charge-sheet is already filed, at this stage, interference

would amount to stwalling of the trial. Therefore, he

prays to dismiss the application.

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned

advocates for the respective parties, bare reading of the

FIR reveals that the applicants were alleged to have the

stick on their hands and riding on the bike. There was no

injury mentioned in the FIR as caused by the applicants.

It further transpires from the FIR that the public way was

restricted by the complainant and his company, as from

the FIR it transpires that the barricades were installed on

the public road and the public peoples were restricted to

pass from the road.

8. It transpires that general allegation to attract the

provision is stated in the FIR. It further transpires that

number of peoples were gathered at the place where

these two persons want to pass from the road. Therefore,

it is also a doubtful story and not believable that

applicants had tried to intimate to the complainant as

well as his colleagues.

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.MA/14602/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2023

undefined

9. Though it is mentioned in the FIR that present applicants

have made abusive language and uttered a word that

land is not belonging to anyone's father, except that

there is no other word mentioned in the FIR with regard

to the allegation of intentional insult.

10. This Court is of the view that the said word would

not be constituted the offence of intentional insult and in

absence of the other words, it is difficult for this Court to

decide that whether those words which are used amount

to any intentional insult. Therefore, this Court is of the

opinion that continuation of proceedings would be abuse

of process of law and therefore the same is required to

be quashed.

11. Resultantly, present application is allowed. The FIR

being II-C.R.No.306 of 2016 registered with Mundra Police

Station, West Kutch is quashed and set aside with all

consequential proceedings. Rule is made absolute

accordingly.

(M. K. THAKKER,J) M.M.MIRZA