[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Sarfraz @ Javid Khuji @ Javid Mufti Salim ... vs State Of Gujarat on 30 March, 2026
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1898/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY
SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 1898 of 2024
==========================================================
SARFRAZ @ JAVID KHUJI @ JAVID MUFTI SALIM HASAN YUSUF
IBRAHIM PATEL & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MUHAMMAD QUASIM VORA(10344) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR UMARFARUK M KHARADI(8155) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR BHARGAV PANDYA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 30/03/2026
ORDER
1. The petitioners are original accused nos.1 and 2, who
have filed the present revision application under Section 438
read with Section 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 (for short, 'BNSS' Act).
2. The petitioners are arraigned as accused in offence
registered with Amod Police Station, Bharuch vide FIR
No.11199003211359 of 2021 for the offences punishable
under Section 4 of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act read
with Section 120(B), 153(b)(1)(c) and 506(2) of the IPC.
3. Learned Advocate Mr. Umarfaruk M. Kharadi submitted
that the trial Court has committed an error by not allowing the
discharge application of the present applicants, where there is
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1898/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
no sufficient evidence to frame the charge and they have been
falsely implicated.
3.1 Advocate Mr. Kharadi submitted that both the petitioners
are Moulvis and it is their religious duty to preach about the
religion and therefore, submitted that no case could have been
drawn against them, who perform the religious act and they
have their fundamental right to do so. Advocate Mr. Kharadi
has also stated that these two persons have been made
accused in the third supplementary charge-sheet.
4. Countering the arguments, learned APP Mr. Bhargav
Pandya submitted that larger conspiracy has been busted and
applicant no.1 Sarfraz @ Javid Khuji @ Javid Mufti Salim
Hasan Yusuf Ibrahim Patel, had earlier too, converted many
innocent villagers into muslims and during the year 2019,
applicant no.1 had along with witnesses Abdul Rahim Bhuji,
Moulvi Saiyed Devla, Amin Delawala had come in a four
wheeler with Ismail Bhagat along with accused Haji Abdulla
along with two other persons at village Kankaria and in the
house of Ajit Vasawa, they had the meeting.
5. The namaz was performed and the applicant no.1 and
Haji Abdul Fhefadawala had delivered the lecture and had also
given knowledge of the muslim religion to those converted as
muslim.
6. APP Mr. Bhargav Pandya submitted that the statements
of Pravinbhai Vasantbhai Vasawa, Mohammad Amin Shabbir
Patel, Saiyed Ahmed Suleman Patel and Abdul Rahim Yusuf
Suleman which shows that the present applicant also known as
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1898/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
Javed Mufti along with the Ismail Belavala had often come to
their village and had given clothes, medicines and cash
amount and had allured to get them converted into muslim
religion. They were providing education to the residents of
Amod village for conversion. There is also a video for the
meeting
7. Learned APP Mr. Pandya has also referred to statements
of Anilkumar Panchiyabhai Vasawa, Rohitbhai Rameshbhai
Vasawa, Ashwinbhai Dhirajbhai Vasawa, Vijaybhai Laxmanbhai
Vasava, Arjunbhai Dalsukhbhai Vasawa, Mukeshbhai Dilipbhai
Vasawa and Pravinbhai Vasantbhai Vasava, who too have
stated against the present applicant Ramiz Raja @ Owaish
Abdul Gani, as involved in providing those converts, who were
promised air cooler, water cooler, hand cart, chattai/chaadar
for offering namaz.
8. It is the argument of learned APP Mr. Bhargav Pandya
that Section 5 of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003
and Rule 3, 4, 5 of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Rules,
2008 were required to be followed which prima-facie on the
record does not get proved. Hence the case has been drawn
against the present applicant.
9. Having considered the evidence against the present
applicants in the form of statements of the witnesses and the
provision of Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2006, no case of
any discharge has been found on the material and statements
perused by this Court. There are evidences of meetings
conducted by the applicant which were for religious
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1898/2024 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026
undefined
conversion. This Court does not find any reason for interfering
in the order passed by the concerned trial Court Judge, since
at the stage of cognizance and summoning, the trial Court has
applied judicial mind to find out whether the prima-facie case
is made out for. Summoning the accused and at the stage of
framing charge, sufficiency of materials for the purpose of
conviction is not the requirement.
10. Hence, the present criminal application stands disposed
of, as rejected.
(GITA GOPI,J)
PARMAR KRISH/60
