Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/2219/2011 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 2219 of 2011
=======================================================
MUJAHIDBHAI
ABDULSAMI SHAIKH & 1 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=======================================================
Appearance :
MR
HEMANT B RAVAL for Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR KP RAVAL APP for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=======================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
Date
: 05/09/2011
ORAL
ORDER
The
present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Articles 14,
19, 21, 226 and 227 of the Constitution
of India as well as under the provisions of the
Criminal
Procedure Code for the prayer that appropriate writ,
order or direction may be issued to the Police Commissioner,
Ahmedabad City and also ordered to Ghatlodia Police not to call the
present petitioners frequently and stop the harassment on the grounds
mentioned in the application.
As
could be seen from the facts stated in the petition referring to a
missing young boy and the statements, which may have been given by
the complainant and others with regard to missing boy, admittedly the
petitioners have been called and their statements have been recorded.
If further investigation requires, they may have to be called for
further investigation and it would not be permissible in law to
prevent the investigation agency from pursuing the investigation.
There is no reason for the exercise of discretionary jurisdiction
under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution
of India or even inherent powers under Section 482 of
the Criminal Procedure Code.
There is no lack of jurisdiction but the point is that it has to be
exercised with care and circumspection. Therefore, there has to be
the basis or foundation to show any kind of violation of fundamental
or human rights. Merely because the suspected person, who is alleged
to have been involved, is called for recording statement, it cannot
be said to a harassment. Therefore, such petition cannot be
entertained and deserves to be dismissed in limine.
Accordingly,
the present petition stands dismissed in limine.
(RAJESH
H.SHUKLA, J.)
/patil
Top
