[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Raju Kheta Karamta (Rabari) vs State Of Gujarat on 21 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7301/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 7301 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
RAJU KHETA KARAMTA (RABARI)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DENISH V MAVADHIYA(9207) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KHODABHAI P PINGAL(12620) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KRINA CALLA, LD. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 21/04/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Ms. Krina
Calla waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no. 1 - State.
2. By way of preferring the present application under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023, the applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent
powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the
First Information Report No.11203012220328 of 2022
lodged before the Chorwad Police Station, District
Junagadh, for the offences punishable under Sections 465,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7301/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 65(a),
65(e), 98(2), 81, 83 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, as well as
the proceedings of the Criminal Case No.244 of 2025
pending before the learned JMFC at Maliya Hatina, District
Junagadh, so also all other consequential proceedings
arising pursuant thereto.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Denish V. Mavadhiya
appearing for the applicant-accused and learned APP Ms.
Krina Calla appearing for the respondent no.1 - State.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Denish V. Mavadhiya appearing
for the present applicant-accused has submitted that the
FIR lodged by the complainant is palpably false. There is not
an iota of evidence to implicate the present applicant-
accused with the alleged offence. He has further submitted
that the complainant has made general allegations against
the applicant-accused, and no specific role has been
attributed to the present applicant- accused. He has further
submitted that the name of the present applicant has been
revealed from the statement of the co- accused, who were
found in conscious possession of the liquor and except the
statement of the co-accused, there is no incriminating
evidence on record against the present applicant- accused.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Denish V. Mavadhiya has
submitted that the impugned FIR, even if it is taken at its
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7301/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
face value, could not even establish the offence as alleged.
He has submitted that the present applicant was not found
in conscious possession of the liquor, and he was not the
owner of the vehicle, from which, the liquor was found and
seized. Learned advocate has further submitted that the
present applicant has nothing to do with the persons, who
were found in conscious possession of the liquor and there
is no evidence of any call records produced by the
prosecution to suggest that the present applicant and the
accused persons were in contact.
6. Learned advocate Mr.Denish Mavadhiya has further
submitted that this Court has already quashed and set
aside the FIR qua the co-accused, namely, Ravi Hamirbhai
Bharai, vide order dated 25.02.2026 in Criminal Misc.
Application No.1738 of 2026. He has, therefore, urged that
considering the above, the present application may be
allowed and the impugned FIR may be quashed and set-
aside.
7. Learned APP Ms. Krina Calla appearing for the
respondent No.1 - State has vehemently opposed the
present application and has submitted that it is true that
the present applicant has been arraigned as an accused
solely on the basis of the statement of the co-accused,
however, as per Section 10 of the Evidence Act, the
statement of the co-accused would be relevant for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7301/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
purpose of investigation since it gives a clue or a piece of
information to inquire or investigate as to the role played by
the accused in the commission of the offence, and if any
satisfactory and reliable evidence or material is found
during the course of the investigation in support of the said
statement given by the co-accused, certainly, the person
against whom the said evidence is available, would be liable
for prosecution. Learned APP Ms. Calla has also submitted
that the present applicant- accused has five antecedents of
a similar type of offence. Therefore, having regard to the
aforesaid, learned APP has urged that the present
application may not be entertained and the same may be
rejected.
8. Having perused the entire materials on record, it prima
facie appears that the present applicant has been arraigned
as an accused solely on the basis of the statement of the co-
accused and this Court has quashed and set aside the FIR
qua the co-accused namely, Ravi Hamirbhai Bharai vide
order dated 25.02.2026 in Criminal Misc. Application
No.1738 of 2026.
The Investigating Officer is present before this Court
with the original papers. While going through the same, it
appears that except the statement of the co-accused, there
is no connecting material found to implicate the present
applicant in the alleged offence. It also appears that the
present applicant was not found in conscious possession of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7301/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
the liquor nor was the owner of the alleged vehicle, from
which, the liquor was found and seized.
9. This Court is conscious of the fact that the statement
of the co-accused is relevant for the purpose of investigation
as per Section 10 of the Evidence Act. However, this Court
also cannot ignore the fact that substantial investigation is
over. This Court has also perused the investigation papers,
and found that except the statement of the co-accused,
there is no incriminating evidence on record. The entire case
of the prosecution rests upon the statement of co-accused.
10. In view of the aforesaid, in absence of any
incriminating materials on record, the further continuation
of the criminal proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR
against the present applicant-accused would be nothing but
futile exercise.
11. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and having considered the arguments
canvassed by them as well as taking into consideration the
averments made in the application, this Court is of the
opinion that there is hardly any likelihood of the applicant-
accused being convicted on the face of such FIR. Thus, it
appears from the aforesaid that sending the applicant -
accused to face the trial would be nothing but a futile
exercise and would amount to abuse of process of law.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7301/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the matter
requires consideration, and to secure the ends of justice,
the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set-aside
in exercise of powers conferred under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
12. In the result, the application is allowed. The First
Information Report No. 11203012220328 of 2022 lodged
before the Chorwad Police Station, District Junagadh, for
the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 of the
Indian Penal Code and under Sections 65(a), 65(e), 98(2),
81, 83 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, as well as the
proceedings of the Criminal Case No.244 of 2025 pending
before the learned JMFC at Maliya Hatina, District
Junagadh, are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside
qua the present applicant-accused. All other consequential
proceedings arising pursuant thereto are also quashed and
set-aside qua the present applicant-accused.
Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
sd/-
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
DIPTI PATEL
