Gujarat High Court High Court

Yogeshbhai vs State on 9 May, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Yogeshbhai vs State on 9 May, 2011
Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/4714/2010	 2/ 2	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 4714 of 2010
 

 
 
For
Approval and Signature:  
 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
 
 
=================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

1
		
		 
			 

Whether
			Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

2
		
		 
			 

To
			be referred to the Reporter or not ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

3
		
		 
			 

Whether
			their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

4
		
		 
			 

Whether
			this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
			interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
			made thereunder ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

5
		
		 
			 

Whether
			it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
		
	

 

 
=================================================


 

YOGESHBHAI
SHANTILAL SHAH & 1 - Applicants
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondents
 

=================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
ASHISH M DAGLI for Applicants : 1 - 2. 
MR. K.P. RAVAL, LD. APP for
Respondent : 1, 
RULE SERVED for Respondent : 2, 
MR MD RANA for
Respondent : 2, 
================================================= 

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 09/05/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
JUDGMENT

Original
accused no. 2 & 3 in FIR No. I-591 of 2005 registered with
Navrangpura police station, Ahmedabad, have approached this Court
invoking provision of Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code for
quashing the same.

Learned
advocate for the petitioners as well as respondent no.2 bank, the
complainant, have submitted that the complaint be quashed as the
petitioners were guarantors and the principal borrower who defaulted
has settled the entire claim of the bank, and now nothing would
survive.

In
view of this, and in view of the fact that the narration in the
complaint also go to show that the bank could have pursued the claim
before appropriate civil forum, instead of filing complaint.
Therefore the complaint and the proceedings thereunder, in view of
the statement made by learned advocate for the complainant is
required to be quashed, and is accordingly quashed. Rule made
absolute.

[
S.R. BRAHMBHATT, J ]

/vgn

   

Top