Gujarat High Court
Suketa Jagdishbhai Parsaniy vs State Of Gujarat on 24 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/7560/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 7560 of 2025
==========================================================
SUKETA JAGDISHBHAI PARSANIY
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KAVAN K PATEL(11303) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VIVEK V BHAMARE(6710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 24/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
Present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution
of India read with Section 528 of the BNSS is filed seeking quashment
of impugned order dated 25.03.2025 passed by the learned 34 th
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad City in Criminal Case
No.20090 of 2019.
Having heard learned advocate for the respective parties and
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 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:
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/7560/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/06/2025
undefined
"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)"
It is also appropriate to refer to the decision of 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 No.19862/2025.
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 Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the BNSS.
Accordingly, present petition is dismissed. It is made clear that this
Court has not gone into the merits of the matter. However, the
petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before
appropriate forum.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
