[Cites 11, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Vipulbhai Dahyabhai Gajipara vs State Of Gujarat on 1 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 2060
of 2026
================================================================
VIPULBHAI DAHYABHAI GAJIPARA & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. A.S.TIMBALIA(7372) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR. ZAFAR K. BELAWALA(14532) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MS. KRINA P.CALLA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 01/04/2026
JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Anik S.Timbalia appearing
for the applicants-accused and learned APP Ms.Krina
P.Calla appearing for the respondent no.1 - State.
2. By way of preferring the present application under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023, the applicants seek to invoke the inherent powers of
this Court praying to quash and set-aside the First
Information Report being C.R. No.11210050211310 of 2021
registered with the Rander Police Station, Surat, for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
offences punishable under Sections 387, 342, 323, 504,
506(2), 120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and under
Sections 25(1)(A) and 27 of the Arms Act, as well as the
proceedings of the Sessions Case No.150 of 2022 pending
before the learned 11th Additional District & Sessions Judge,
Surat.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Anik S.Timbalia appearing for the
applicants-accused has submitted that there is no evidence
against the present applicants-accused, and they have been
falsely implicated in the alleged offence. He has further
submitted that the impugned FIR was filed by the
complainant on misconception of facts and, therefore, the
complainant has also filed an affidavit dated 11.01.2026,
inter alia stating that the matter has been amicably settled,
and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed and set-aside
qua the present applicants.
4. Learned advocate Mr.Timbalia has, therefore,
submitted that since the dispute has been amicably settled
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
between the parties and there is no ill-will or grievance
against them, the present application may be allowed and
the impugned FIR as well as the proceedings of the Sessions
Case may be quashed and set-aside qua the present
applicants-accused.
5. It is noteworthy that the present applicants-accused
had earlier preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.10826 of
2021, which came to be withdrawn vide order dated
14.07.2021 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court.
Thereafter, the present applicant no.1 had preferred
discharge application before the trial court, which came to
be rejected. The applicant had, therefore, preferred Criminal
Revision Application No.537 of 2023 before this Court,
which is still pending.
6. It is also noteworthy that the applicant no.1 Vipulbhai
Dahyabhai Gajipara is the kingpin of an organized crime
syndicate known as Vipul Gajipara Gang, whereas, the
applicant no.2 Altaf Gafurbhai Patel is one of the main
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
members of the said syndicate, and against the applicant
no.1 - Vipulbhai Dahyabhai Gajipara, in all, 11 serious
offences, including an offence under the provisions of the
GUJCTOC Act, have been registered; whereas, 12 serious
offences have been registered against the applicant no.2 -
Altaf Gafurbhai Patel in the States of Gujarat and
Maharashtra. It is alleged that they administer threats to
the victims either to kill them or to face dire consequences.
7. In the aforesaid background, this Court has to
consider the peculiar facts of the impugned FIR. As per the
say of the complainant, on 16.06.2021 at around 12:30 in
the midnight, when he had gone to purchase medicines for
his wife, along with his friend Asil Fakira, on his motorcycle,
at that time, when they reached near Chistiya Tower, two
cars intercepted them, and the accused persons, after
alighting from the said cars, caught hold of the complainant
and drove him towards Ganganagar Society near Jilani
Bridge, where, in an open plot, the accused Abdullah
Manjra, along with his friends Bhuro Shaikh and Zuber,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
had demanded Rs.4 crore from the complainant as
GST/ransom and threatened to kill him. It is alleged that
when the complainant raised his objection, the accused
persons abused and threatened him to face dire
consequences if the amount in form of protection/extortion
money is not paid to them. Furthermore, claiming affiliation
with the organized crime syndicate of Altaf Patel and Vipul
Gajipara gang, they pointed a firearm at the complainant's
abdomen, putting him in fear of imminent death or grievous
hurt, and forcibly demanded a sum of Rs.4 crore, and
threatened him of fatal consequences on failure to comply.
Thereafter, the accused persons committed assault on the
complainant and his friend Asil Fakira through physical
violence. The victims were subjected to wrongful
confinement and detention, deprived of their personal
liberty, and were released only at around 2:45 a.m.
8. On bare perusal of the impugned FIR, it prima facie
appears that the present applicant no.1 is the leader of the
organized crime syndicate and the applicant no.2 is one of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
its members. Furthermore, it appears that this criminal
syndicate is engaging in systematic extortion, whereby they
intentionally place the victims in reasonable apprehension
of death or grievous hurt to extort, obtain, or compel the
delivery of protection money/ransom. By administering
direct threats to life or conveying dire consequences, the
gang creates a state of duress, compelling the victims to act
against their will. This conduct constitutes serious criminal
intimidation in order to commit extortion.
9. Considering the seriousness and gravamen of the
offences committed by this gang, this Court had directed the
learned APP to call for the police report, and in response to
same, the learned APP tendered a report dated 05.02.2026
signed by Shri R.J.Chaudhary, Police Inspector, Rander
Police Station, Surat city. Considering the same, this Court
further directed the Investigating Officer of this case to
provide material against the present applicants-accused. It
appears that the police has collected CCTV footage, which
clearly supports the facts narrated by the complainant in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
the impugned FIR. The investigation reveals that upon
learning of the registration of the impugned FIR, the
accused, Abdullah Manjra, disposed of the weapon of
offense (pistol) into the Tapi River. Furthermore, a perusal of
the police report/charge sheet prima facie establishes the
complicity of the applicants-accused in the alleged crime.
10. It further appears that considering the involvement of
the present applicants-accused in the alleged offence and
their criminal background, this Court had directed the
Investigating Officer to provide details of various other
offences registered against both the applicants-accused,
who are the leader and the active member of the organized
crime syndicate. In response to the same, the police had
provided the details regarding all the offences registered
against both the applicants-accused along with the
statements of several witnesses including the secret
witnesses. Considering the same, it clearly appears that
both the applicants are headstrong persons having criminal
background. The evidence further establishes that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
accused have perpetrated numerous serious egregious
offences, fostering a climate of fear across various areas of
Surat city through illicit collaborations with the interstate
criminal syndicates from Uttar Pradesh and other states.
The record indicates a systemic pattern of witness
intimidation and victim coercion, whereby complainants are
routinely subjected to threats intended to compel the
withdrawal of prosecutions or the execution of compromise
affidavits. These allegations are substantiated by the
depositions of the protected witnesses, whose testimony
corroborates the existence of this ongoing criminal
enterprise.
11. It is high time to reiterate that in cases involving
serious offenses, the Court cannot mechanically quash an
FIR based on a settlement between the parties. Allowing
such a course in grave offences would send a pernicious
message to the society, fostering a culture of impunity
where offenders, emboldened by the prospect of evading the
law, may dare to perpetrate such offences repeatedly.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
12. Considering the cumulative factors, this Court is of the
considered opinion that it cannot overlook or ignore the
criminal antecedents of such headstrong offenders, nor the
intense terror and atrocities inflicted upon the victims and
the society at large. The inherent powers under Section 482
of the Cr.P.C. (or Section 528 BNSS) cannot be invoked to
dilute the serious nature of the alleged crimes, as public
interest overrides private settlement in such cases.
13. This Court has also considered the guidelines laid
down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of
Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others,
reported in 1992 (Supp.1) SCC 335, while exercising the
inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, with regard to quashing of the criminal
proceedings.
14. While this Court is mindful of its extraordinary
jurisdiction to intervene when the material on record fails to
disclose a prima facie case or when the proceedings
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2060/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026
undefined
constitute an abuse of the process of law, the instant case
does not warrant such interference. Upon careful scrutiny of
the materials on record, a prima facie case against the
applicants is evident, and it cannot be concluded that the
applicants have been falsely implicated. Therefore, this
Court is of the opinion that the prosecution must be
afforded the opportunity to prove its case through cogent
evidence at trial.
15. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is not
a fit case to exercise inherent discretion to quash the
proceedings at the threshold. Consequently, the present
application is devoid of any merits and the same is hereby
dismissed in limine.
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J.)
/MOINUDDIN
