Gujarat High Court
Dhaval Dhirenbhai Pujara vs State Of Gujarat on 3 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13849/2019 ORDER DATED: 03/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 13849 of 2019
==========================================================
DHAVAL DHIRENBHAI PUJARA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARSH M SURTI(3907) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. KANVA ANTANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 03/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure (for short "the Code"), the applicant seeks quashing of FIR No.
III-57 of 2019 registered with D.C.B. Police Station, Rajkot, for the
offences punishable under Sections 6E, 116B and 81 of the Gujarat
Prohibition Act and all proceedings arising therefrom.
2. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that other accused
who stood trial in Criminal Case No. 28742 of 2022 arising from the same
FIR have been acquitted by the learned trial Court. It is urged that the name
of the petitioner in the FIR surfaces solely on the basis of the statement of a
co-accused and that the persons alleged to have gathered and transported
the Indian-made foreign liquor have already been acquitted. Learned
advocate contends that the role attributed to the petitioner does not stand
on a higher pedestal than that of those co-accused who have been
exonerated, and hence, continuation of proceedings against the petitioner
would be manifestly unjust and an abuse of the process of law.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13849/2019 ORDER DATED: 03/11/2025
undefined
3. Per contra, learned APP has placed on record a report indicating that
as many as seventeen offences have been registered against the petitioner,
which, according to the learned APP, may dissuade this Court from
exercising its inherent jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner.
4. I have heard the learned advocates for both sides and carefully
examined the record. In brief, the case against the petitioner is based only
on the statement of a co-accused. The persons who were actually alleged to
have transported or handled the liquor were tried in Criminal Case No.
28742 of 2022 and have already been acquitted by the learned trial Court. It
is also important to note that the judgment and order of acquittal passed by
the trial Court have not been challenged by the State before any higher
court, and therefore, that acquittal has become final between the State and
those co-accused.
5. It is well settled that the powers under Section 482 of the Code are to
be exercised sparingly. However, when continuation of criminal proceedings
would clearly result in injustice or amount to misuse of the process of law,
the Court is bound to step in to prevent such abuse. When other accused,
who were facing the same allegations or even more serious allegations, have
already been acquitted by a judgment that has attained finality, it would not
be proper or fair to continue criminal proceedings against the petitioner
whose alleged role is even lesser.
6. The report placed on record mentioning several other cases registered
against the petitioner, by itself, cannot be a ground to deny relief in the
present matter. Each case must be considered on its own facts, and in this
case, there is no independent evidence against the petitioner apart from the
unverified statement of a co-accused. The material on record does not
disclose any direct or reliable evidence connecting the petitioner with the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13849/2019 ORDER DATED: 03/11/2025
undefined
alleged offence.
7. It also appears that the main witnesses, whose statements formed the
basis of the prosecution case, have already been examined during the trial of
the co-accused, and even then, the Court found no evidence sufficient to
convict them. When the persons who were alleged to have been directly
involved have been acquitted and the State has accepted that judgment,
there remains no justification to continue proceedings against the petitioner,
who stands on the same or even weaker footing.
8. In light of the above discussion and considering that the acquittal of
the co-accused has attained finality, it would serve no useful purpose to
continue the present proceedings. Doing so would only result in
unnecessary hardship and would amount to misuse of the process of law.
9. In wake of above reasons, the petition deserves consideration and
accordingly, it is allowed. The impugned FIR registered as III-57 of 2019
registered with D.C.B. Police Station, Rajkot and further proceedings
arising thereof are hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioner herein.
Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
MANISH MISHRA
