Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2012CrLJ355(NOC)
1. The present Special Criminal Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner-Smt Payal Mihirbhai Patel (original accused no. 3 as described in the charge-sheet) to quash and set aside the order dated 14/09/2010 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad below Exh. 2 in Criminal Case No. 147/2010 by which the learned Magistrate has rejected the application submitted by the petitioner to discharge her for the offences alleged arising out of the FIR, being C.R. No. I 1/2010 registered with Mahila Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as well as the impugned order dated 09/12/2010 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Criminal Revision Application No. 462/2010 by which the learned revisional Court has dismissed the said Revis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2006CriLJ3198; (2006)3GLR1935
J.R. Vora, J.1. At the admission stage, since submissions made at length, the matter was heard finally and learned counsels also agreed for final hearing of the matter.2. Learned advocate Mr. Asin Pandya for the applicants, learned APP Mr. K.C.Shah for the respondent No. 1 ' State of Gujarat and learned advocate Mr. M.A. Bukhari for the respondent No. 2 ' Shri Ismail U. Vohra, were heard at length.3. The present applicants are amongst the accused of Sessions Case No. 199 of 2003 pending before the Court of Sessions i.e. Fast Track Court Judge, at Anand, while respondent No. 1 is the State and the respondent No. 2 herein is the witness of the said trial and filed an application at Ex.245 on 01.03.2005. It was contended by such application that the investigation was biased in favour of the accused and was defective and hence re-investigation was necessary. It was stated that the persons affected in the incident were robbed of their valuables as well as cash amount, but the said muddamal ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2002)4GLR3260
S.K. Keshote, J.1. In all these three matters, not only the parties are common but identical order is passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.2, Ahmedabad and therein the facts and questions of law raised are common. In fact, three separate complaints have been filed by the Insurance Inspector, E.S.I. Corporation, Ahmedabad and that is how three separate petitions are there. In view of these facts, these matters are taken up for hearing together and are being decided by this common order. The facts of the case and the grounds of challenge to the order are being taken up from special criminal application No.940/98.2. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with sections 397 and 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner challenges the legality, validity and propriety of the order passed below Ex.2 in Criminal Case No.2611/95 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.2, Ahmedabad dated 9-7-1998. Further prayer has b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2009CriLJ163
ORDERK.A. Puj, J.1. The applicants - original accused have filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing and setting aside the private complaint filed by the opponent No. 2 - original complainant before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad (for short Trial Court') which is registered as Criminal Case No. 382 of 1996 and charge-sheet filed on 13.02.1996 and further orders/proceedings of the said Criminal Case No. 382 of 1996 pending before the Trial Court.2. This Court has issued rule on 26.11.2002 and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly, the nature of the disputes and the age of the petitioner No. 2 who was aged about 83 years and was suffering from paralysis and was totally bed-ridden and at the verge of death, was also dragged into litigation by the complainant, ad-interim relief was granted in terms of paragraph 6 (c) of the petition whereby further proceedings of Criminal Case No. 382 of 1996 pend...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : [1998]92CompCas344(Guj); (1997)3GLR2041
S.D. Pandit, J.Rule. 1. Satishkumar Jayantilal Shah, the original accused in Criminal Case No. 2361 of 1992, on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 9, Ahmedabad, has filed the present petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 2. The petitioner has been prosecuted by respondent No. 2 for the alleged offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, by alleging that the present petitioner had taken goods worth Rs. 1,43,248.40 from respondent No. 2-company, Unipole Plastics Pvt. Ltd., in the period running between January 10, 1992, and February 8, 1992, and that towards the said dues four cheques bearing Nos. 384226, 384246, 384243 and 384249, dated February 15, 1992, March 15, 1992, March 16, 1992, and March 25, 1992, for the respective amounts of Rs. 46,926.20, Rs. 1,234.90, Rs. 46,920.20 and Rs. 48,168.10 were given and that the said cheques were presented to respondent No. 2's bankers and they were dishonoured by e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR1962Guj261
RAJU, J. 1. This Criminal Appeal No. 302 of 1961 is a criminal appeal filed by the State against the order of acquittal of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 by. the Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Mehsana The appeal was admitted by a Division Bench of this Court on 28-6-61. The Government Pleader has now stated that respondent No. 1 is dead as he has been reported to be murdered. He, therefore, requests this Court to pass an order that Criminal Appeal No. 302 of 1961 abates as regards respondent No. 1 and that it should be decided, as regards respondent No. 2.2. Mr. Patel who appears for the respondents; urges that under Section 431, Criminal Procedure Code, the appeal abates as a whole. This section reads as follows :, 'Every appeal under Section 411-A Subsection (2), or Section 417, shall finally abate on the death of the accused, and every other appeal under this Chapter (except an appeal from a sentence, of fine) shall finally abate on the death of the appellant.'This section has not been...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2004CriLJ3200
R.P. Dholakia, J. 1. Rule. Learned A.P.P., Mrs.Hansa Punani, waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State in both the petitions. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, both these petitions are taken up for final hearing.2. Both these petitions have been filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the First Information Reports being C.R.No.II-3187 of 2002 lodged with the Danilimda Police Station and C.R.No.I-530 of 2002 lodged with Naroda Police Station and for deleting the name of the petitioner from the respective charge-sheets showing him as an absconding accused mainly on the ground that the only evidence available with the investigating agency is the statement of co-accused and also on the ground that the present petitioner is a social worker who has organized relief camp under the banner of Hajarat Shah-e-Alam Relief Camp at Ahmedabad and who has made grievance against the administration befor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2005)2GLR1716
D.K. Trivedi, J.1. The petitioner accused has moved this court and filed Revision Application, as he was one of the accused involved in an offence registered vide C.R.No.I-23/04 at Naranpura Police Station for the offences under Section 306 etc. of the IPC. It is also the case of the petitioner that he was also arrested by the police in respect of the offence registered vide C.R.No.I-2/04 at Sahibaug Police Station for the offences under Sections 376(2)(g) and 120(B) of the IPC. The accused was arrested by the police on 15.1.2004.2. While filing this Revision Application, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.7, Ahmedabad below application Exh.4 in Sessions Case No.239/04 by which the application submitted by the petitioner accused for supply of certified copy of the documents, which had been furnished alongwith the charge-sheet to the applicant, in English or Hindi language at the earliest to enable the petitioner accused to defen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2006CriLJ2039
K.A. Puj, J.1. Since common issue is involved in all these petitions and since the arguments are also commonly canvassed by Mr. K.M. Patel, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Mukesh Patel, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent No. 5, all these petitions are disposed of by this common order and judgment.2. Cri. Misc. Application No. 5741 of 2004 is filed by the petitioners-original accused Nos. 1 to 4 in Criminal Case No. 5791 of 2002 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhavnagar.3. Cri. Misc. Application No. 5742 of 2004 is filed by the petitioners-original accused Nos. 1 to 5 in Criminal Case No. 1460 of 2002 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Talaja. 4. Cri. Misc. Application No. 5743 of 2004 is filed by the petitioners-original accused Nos. 1 to 4 in Criminal Case No. 16 of 2002 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad.5. Cri. Misc. Application No. 5744 of 2004 is filed by the petitioners-original accused No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : 2009CriLJ1486; (2009)1GLR91
D.N. Patel, J.1. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 26th October, 1993 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Sessions Case No. 11 of 1993, whereby the present appellant has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby the appellant was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default, further simple imprisonment of one month. The appellant has also been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/, in default, further simple imprisonment of one month has been awarded. Both the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently.2. Brief facts of the present case are as under:On 8th June, 1992 at about 2-00 p.m., there was a hot altercation betwe...
Tag this Judgment!