Gujarat High Court
Shri Pradip Hiralal Chotaliya vs State Of Gujarat on 18 November, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1083/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR CHALLENGING
VIRES/ULTRA VIRES) NO. 1083 of 2024
=============================================
SHRI PRADIP HIRALAL CHOTALIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR ANAND B GOGIA(5849) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KAJAL L KALWANI(6623) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR MAHESHB BARIYA(2234) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS.MAITHILI MEHTA, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 18/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. Having noted the submissions made in the affidavit
dated 14.11.2025 filed by the District Collector, Rajkot, it is
categorically stated that on the application dated 26.09.2023
passed by respondent No.2 under the Gujarat Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 2020 (for short, "the Land Grabbing Act'
2020"), the matter was not placed before the Committee
headed by the Collector, Rajkot, rather opinion was sought
from the Police and the District Supply Officer (an officer of
the Deputy Collector rank), before this Court had taken
cognizance of this matter.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1083/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/11/2025
undefined
2. Further, since by order dated 25.01.2024, this Court has
stayed further proceedings under the Land Grabbing Act'
2020, no further proceedings has commenced so far.
3. It is also stated that the petitioner has initiated
proceedings against the respondent No.2 and another person
before the Small Causes Court and the said case is numbered
as Small Cause Suit No.01 of 2024.
4. The specific contention in the writ petition is that the
father of the petitioner was a tenant in the shop in the
building known as "Labhu Villa Building" on the ground floor,
since the year 1967, located in Kadiya Nav Line, Street No.10
of Rajkot, and was doing business of the printing press. The
petitioner had taken joined the business with his father. After
demise of the original tenant, the tenancy right in the shop in
question has been devolved upon the petitioner.
5. The complainants are the subsequent purchasers of the
property in question from the original landlord vide sale deed
dated 23.10.1980. It is, thus, contended that there were pre-
existing tenancy rights with respect to the shop in question in
favour of the petitioner and the property was purchased with
the sitting tenant.
6. A Regular Civil Suit No. 214 of 1991 was filed by the
purchaser against the father of the petitioner before the Civil
Court, Rajkot seeking for decree of eviction, which was
dismissed vide judgment and order dated 24.02.1997 while
holding that the father of the petitioner was tenant of the suit
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1083/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/11/2025
undefined
premises since 1967 and the landlord was residing at the first
floor of the building in question.
7. Placing the judgment and decree dated 24.02.1996, it is
submitted before us that the tenancy rights of the father of
the petitioner in the shop in question has been established
before the Civil Court and since the petitioner has legally
inherited the tenancy after the death of his father, he cannot
be termed as the 'land grabber'.
8. It is further contended that even after the sale of the
shop in question, the purchasers used to collect rent till 2019
and only after 2019, they refused to accept the rent, which
was, then, tendered, up to 31.01.2024, by money order. The
copies of the sample rent receipts and the money order dated
11.01.2024 have been appended with the writ petition.
9. There are assertions in the writ petition as to how and in
what manner, the respondent landlord / complainant was
harassing the petitioner.
10. Be that as it may, inspite of the aforesaid facts, it seems
on the complaint filed by the respondent No.2 alleging offence
under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Land Grabbing Act' 2020, the
proceedings have been initiated by the District Collector,
Rajkot, wherein respondent No.3, namely the Assistant Police
Commissioner (South) has tendered his report dated
29.10.2023, stating that the case under the Land Grabbing
Act' 2020 is made out, making recommendation for
registration of the first information report. A copy of the said
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1083/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/11/2025
undefined
report in respect of the complaint filed by the respondent
No.2 is appended as Annexure 'A' to the writ petition.
11. Taking note of the above facts, we are of the considered
opinion that the complaint filed by the respondent No.2 under
the Land Grabbing Act' 2020 against the petitioner, who is the
sitting tenant of the shop in question, is nothing but an act of
sheer misuse of the process of law and an effort to cause
undue harassment to the sitting tenant.
12. When these facts were brought before the officer
concerned, namely respondent No.3 in writing, in the
response submitted by the petitioner to the notice issued by
him, in our considered opinion, it was incumbent upon the
officer to consign the complaint or to place correct facts
before the District Collector. In no manner, the respondent
No.3 could have formed an opinion of the offenses under the
Land Grabbing Act' 2020 having been made out when the
contention of the petitioner in his written response was that
his father was inducted in the shop in question as the original
landlord. This fact submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner is reflected from the report dated 29.10.2023
submitted by the respondent No.3.
13. It is, thus, evident that the respondent No.3, namely the
Assistant Police Commissioner (South) who was directed to
make an inquiry by the Collector on lodging of the complaint,
has misdirected himself in forming an opinion of making
recommendation for proceeding to lodge a complaint for the
offences under the Land Grabbing Act' 2020.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1083/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/11/2025
undefined
14. However, the fact remains that the said report was never
placed before the committee, as stated in the affidavit of the
Secretary, and no final opinion has been formed by the
committee for proceeding further with the complaint under
the Land Grabbing Act' 2020.
15. In this scenario, while quashing the report dated
29.10.2023 submitted by the respondent No.3 to the
Collector, the complaint filed by the respondent No.2 is
hereby quashed being frivolous and motivated one, filed in
sheer abuse of law.
16. With the above, the prayer No. "10(c)" in the writ
petition is hereby granted. Accordingly, the writ petition
stands allowed. No order as to costs.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
SAHIL S. RANGER
