Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/1190/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1190 of 2010
=========================================================
BABABHAI
DEVJIBHAI SOLANKI - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 4 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
AFTABHUSEN ANSARI for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MS CM SHAH, APP for Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE
SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3.
MR SIDDHARTH H DAVE for
Respondent(s) : 4 -
5.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 15/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Counsel
for the petitioner vehemently submitted that a case of murder has
been not properly investigated and being passed on as one of suicide.
He contended that just before the unfortunate death of son of the
petitioner, there were heated exchanges between him and some of the
persons residing in the neighbourhood. He further submitted that
the theory of deceased having committed suicide by jumping in the
river is highly improbable since there was absolutely no reason for
the deceased to end his life. The prosecution has not brought on
record any reason for the deceased to commit suicide. He, therefore,
submitted that further investigation is necessary.
Learned
APP for the State, however, produced for my perusal a communication
of the IO to the Public Prosecutor suggesting that all angles have
been properly investigated. There is no evidence to suggest that the
son of the petitioner was killed. There were eye-witness account to
suggest that he himself jumped in the river. Learned counsel for the
private respondents contended that there were no serious injuries on
the body of the deceased. He died of drowning.
In
view of the above aspects emerging from the record, at this stage, I
see no reason to grant further investigation. However, if
ultimately, the Investigating Agency submits report before the
concerned Magistrate, it would be open for the petitioner to oppose
the same and request for further investigation on specific points
which he may be able to point out. If such approach is made, the
learned Magistrate shall examine all aspects of the matter before
passing final order thereon.
It
will be open for the Investigating Agency to record the statements
of respondent Nos.4 and 5. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.4
and 5 assured that they will cooperate with such recording of the
statement.
With
the above observations, the petition is disposed of.
(Akil
Kureshi, J.)
(vjn)
Top