[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Mahmad Aamad Pithadiya vs Mukesh Laxmidas Vaid on 7 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/626/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 626 of 2012
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
============================================
MAHMAD AAMAD PITHADIYA
Versus
MUKESH LAXMIDAS VAID & ANR.
============================================
Appearance:
ADVOCATE NOTICE SERVED for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR .B A PATEL(5281) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PM LAKHANI(1326) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MRS R P LAKHANI(3811) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS. DIMPLE L. JOSHI(6407) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 07/04/2026
JUDGMENT
(1) Today, when the matter is called out, the applicant remained
absent despite service of Advocate notice to the applicant.
Therefore, it clearly appears that the applicant is not interested
in prosecuting the present matter. Hence, in view of the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Taj
Mohammad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/626/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
No.2421 of 2023, decided on 11.08.2023, this Court has
considered the averments made in the present revision
application as well as the material placed on record and has
proceeded to decide the matter in absence of the applicant
based on available material on record.
(2) By way of present criminal revision application the applicant has
sought following relief :
"(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to stay the execution,
implementation and operation of the impugned order
passed in Criminal Appeal No.18/2011 passed by the Ld.
3rd Additional Sessions Judge and further be pleased to
release the petitioner on bail on appropriate terms and
conditions as may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court,
pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this
petition, in the interest of justice;"
(3) Perusing the record it appears that the accused was convicted in
Criminal Case No.4509 of 2006, however, in the prayer clause of
para-7 of the present revision application the applicant has
sought quashing and setting aside the order dated 22.11.2012,
in Criminal Appeal No.18 of 2011, passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar, but no prayer is sought for
quashing of the judgment and order dated 26.05.2011, in
Criminal Case No.4509 of 2006, passed by the learned 11 th
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar. Even if for the
sake of arguments if the order passed by the learned Sessions
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/626/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
Judge is quashed then also the order passed by the learned trial
Court will remain in force as the same is not challenged in the
present application and therefore no interference of this Court is
required.
(4) In addition the scope of revisional jurisdiction is very limited and
power under Section 401 of the Code is discretionary and it is
required to be used only in exceptional cases where glaring
defect in the procedure and manifest error of law or there has
been miscarriage of justice. Here no any such error is pointed
out or no perversity or illegality is found from the reasons
assigned by both the Courts below, therefore, no case is made
out to upset the concurrent findings of the learned trial Court
and Appellate Court. Moreover, the revisional jurisdiction itself
does not provide reappreciation of evidence and considering the
limited jurisdiction the Court cannot act as Appellate Court.
Hence, no case is made out for interference with the impugned
findings in light of scope of revision laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Amit Kapoor Vs. Ramesh Chander, reported in
2012 (9) SCC 460.
(5) In view of above, the present Criminal Revision Application
stands dismissed. Record and proceedings, if any, be sent back
to the concerned Court forthwith.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/626/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2026
undefined
(6) The applicant - accused is directed to surrender before the Jail
Authority to serve the remaining sentence. Bail bonds of the
applicant stands discharged.
(7) If the applicant fails to surrender, the learned trial Court shall
issue a warrant against the applicant.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT JANSARI
