Gujarat High Court High Court

Jashodaben vs State on 18 September, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Jashodaben vs State on 18 September, 2008
Author: Md Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCR.A/175320/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1753 of
2008 
 
=========================================================

 

JASHODABEN
MAHIPATSINH CHAVDA - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
NIRAL R MEHTA for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR LR PUJARI ASST. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH
		
	

 

Date
: 18/09/2008 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1. By
way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to transfer the
investigation to higher officer in connection with F.I.R. being C.R.
No.I- 184 of 2008 dated 13.07.2007 registered with Halol Police
Station and to further direct them to add Section 363 of I.P.C. in
the said complaint.

2. Heard.

Mr. Pujari, learned APP has submitted that one Mr. P.R. Shah, P.I.,
Halol Police Station is personally present in the Court with the
relevant record. On instructions from Mr. Shah, Mr. Pujari has
submitted that the investigating officer is making thorough inquiry
into the matter. Mr. Pujari, has further submitted that during the
course of investigation it is revealed that both Hiren @ Pintoo
Bhailal Chauhan-original accused and Rajshree Mahipatsinh
Chavda-victim have got married and they have also registered the
marriage. Apart from that statement of the victim Rajshree is also
recorded in which she has stated that she has got married with Hiren
and they are happily living together as husband and wife. Mr.
Pujari, learned APP has submitted that, at present, both Hiren and
Rajshree have left their place of residence on account of fear.

3. From
the above discussion, it clearly transpires that the I.O. is carrying
out the investigation properly and hence, no interference is called
for by this Court. Hence, the petition is rejected.

(M.D.

Shah,J.)

Umesh/

   

Top