Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/9635/2010 2/ 2 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 9635 of 2010
With
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 13988 of 2010
In
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 9635 of 2010
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================
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 ?
=========================================
BHAVESHBHAI
NARESHCHANDRA AMIN - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR VIRAL
SHAH for MR TATTVAM K PATEL for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR PK JANI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s)
: 1,
MR JB PARDIWALA with MR JIGAR M PATEL for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 25/11/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. Present
Criminal Miscellaneous Application under section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the applicant –
original accused No.3 – Bhaveshbhai Nareshchandra Amin to quash
and set aside the Criminal Inquiry Case No.153/2010 pending before
the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad as well as
complaint/FIR being M. Case No.2/2010 registered with DCB, Ahmedabad
City.
2. Today,
when the application is taken up for hearing, Shri Viral Shah,
learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant has produced on
record one additional affidavit affirmed by the applicant and relying
upon some documents/report and upon telephonic instruction from Shri
Tattvam K. Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
applicant, he seeks permission to withdraw the present application
unconditionally.
3. Without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and/or even the
report of the concerned investigating officer and without accepting
the same, applicant is simply permitted to withdraw the present
Criminal Miscellaneous Application. However, it is observed that if
any report is submitted by the investigating officer before the
concerned Magistrate, in that case, it is ultimately for the
concerned Magistrate to consider the same in accordance with law and
on merits and to consider whether the said report is to be accepted
or not and even before accepting such report, opportunity is to be
given to the complainant to lodge its objections against the said
report and the learned Magistrate is bound to consider the same in
accordance with law and on merits.
4. With
this, present application is dismissed as withdrawn. Notice
discharged. Ad-interim relief granted earlier stands vacated
forthwith.
5. In
view of the disposal of the main Criminal Miscellaneous Application
No.9635/2010, no order in Criminal Miscellaneous Application
No.13988/2010.
(M.R.
Shah, J.)
*menon
Top