Gujarat High Court
Babulal Bhikamchand Nanavaty vs Futarmal Parasmal Jain on 9 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3314/2017 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 3314 of 2017
With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2017
In R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3314 of 2017
==========================================================
BABULAL BHIKAMCHAND NANAVATY & ORS.
Versus
FUTARMAL PARASMAL JAIN & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. KETKI P JHA(9864) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
ATULKUMAR P KAMDAR(8164) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR UMANG R VYAS(5595) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR CHINTAN DAVE, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 09/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Rahil Jain seeks permission to file
Vakalatnama on behalf of private respondent. Permission is
granted. Heard learned advocate Ms.Jha for the petitioners,
learned advocate Mr.Rahil Jain for private respondent and
learned APP for respondent - State.
2. What could be noticed on perusing petition as well as
documents annexed with the petition that private respondent
has filed private complaint before learned JMFC, Palitana for
alleged offence under sections 406, 409, 417, 467, 468, 469,
470, 471, 114 of IPC. Various contentions were raised in the
private complaint by the private respondent herein. Learned
Trial Court has recorded verification of the complainant and
passed order to post-pone issuance of process and handed over
inquiry to the police under section 202 of Cr.P.C. Police has
conducted inquiry and filed report which is placed on record at
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3314/2017 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
page no.227 to 243 and according to inquiry report offence
under section 406, 409, 417, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471 and 114 of
IPC was made out. However, learned JMFC in inquiry
proceedings was of different view and ultimately by order dated
20.11.2012, learned JMFC, Palitana dismissed the complaint
under section 203 of Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by said order, respondent
preferred Criminal Revision Application No.1 of 2013 before the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar. Learned
Revisional Court after considering documents on record
including inquiry report was pleased to allow the Revision and
quashed and set aside order passed by learned JMFC, Palitana
in Inquiry Case No.7 of 2011 and directed learned JMFC,
Palitana to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.
Noticeably, order of learned Revisional Court is ambagious. What
proceedings learned JMFC is to be conducted is not clear from
the order passed by learned Revisional Court. Further stark
error is noticed in the order of learned Revisional Court that
accused were not joined party defendant and yet order is
adversity was passed by learned Revisional Court.
3. Ratio of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Manoharbhai, Muljibhai Kakadia and another versus
Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel and others reported in
2012(10) SCC 517 squarely applies to the case on hand. Error
crept in order of the Revisional Court is governed by judgment of
Manoharbhai (supra). No adverse order can be passed in
absence of accused by the learned Revisional Court.
4. In premises of aforesaid aspects, this Court is not inclined
to touch merits of the case to quash and set aside order passed
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3314/2017 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
by Revisional Court in Criminal Revision Application No.1 of
2013 only on the ground that accused were not joined as party
respondent in Revision. Hence, order of learned Revisional Court
is suffering from illegality.
5. In view of above, the petition is allowed. Impugned order
passed in Criminal Revision Application No.1 of 2013 is quashed
and set aside. Criminal Revision Application No.1 of 2013 is
restored to its original proceedings. All the persons who are
made accused by the learned Trial Court are ordered to be joined
as respondent in the matter. Process shall be issued by the
learned Trial Court to them. After hearing both the parties on
merits, learned Revisional Court shall make endeavor to decide
the Revision Application as early as possible. In view of
allegations of offence in the year 2010, learned Revisional Court
is directed to decide the Revision Application within four months
from the date of receipt of present order.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything
on merits and de-merits of the impugned order and order passed
by learned JMFC. It would be open for both the parties to
contend their submission before the learned Revisional Court.
7. In view of above, Criminal Misc. Application No.1 of 2017
does not survive and accordingly, stand disposed of.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SATISH
