Gujarat High Court High Court

Mumtazben vs Commissioner on 6 May, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Mumtazben vs Commissioner on 6 May, 2010
Author: Jayant Patel,&Nbsp;Honourable Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCR.A/583/2010	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 583 of 2010
 

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

 

MUMTAZBEN
ANARBHAI SANGHVANI - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

COMMISSIONER
OF POLICE, RAJKOT & 5 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
VH KANARA for
Applicant(s) : 1,MR VIJAY H NANGESH for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MR KP
RAVAL, APP for Respondent(s) : 1, 
RULE UNSERVED for Respondent(s)
: 2 - 3. 
MRHARSHITSTOLIA for Respondent(s) : 4 - 6. 
MRPARTHSTOLIA
for Respondent(s) : 4 -
6. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 06/05/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)

Pursuant
to the earlier order passed by this Court, the learned APP has
placed on record the report received from the Police Inspector,
Gandhigram Police Station. Respondents No.4 and 5 are also
personally present.

The
unfortunate part is that two envelopes are forwarded to this Court
regarding making grievance about the orders passed by this Court and
the implementation thereof. One of the letters is stated to have
been written by Roshanben Sanghvani, respondent No.6, claiming that
the human rights are violated and the another letter is written by
respondent No.5, stating that the family is suffering on account of
the alleged harassment by the police, every time the inquiry is
being held, since this Court has passed the order. The tenor of
both the letters is that the search warrant should be cancelled and
the child should be allowed to remain with the father as he has
done.

This
Court would have taken serious action for addressing correspondence
in this regard, however, the learned Counsel for respondents No.4,
5, and 6, under the instructions of his clients, has tendered
unconditional apology, stating that they were not knowing about the
seriousness of the matter.

Be
it noted that when the matter is at large pending before this Court,
any submission to be made by the parties to the proceedings, has to
be made in the Court and cannot be by way of correspondence to any
Judge of this Court, that too, one of the Judges of the Bench, as
done in the present case. However, as the apology is tendered, we
leave the matter at that stage.

As
a last opportunity, S.O. to 11.5.2010.
The Police shall make use of all intelligence available with it, if
required, with the help of the Assistant Deputy Commissioner of
Police, Rajkot City and L.C.B., and the attempts shall be made to
produce the corpus before this Court on the next date.

It
is also observed that if the respondent is voluntarily desirous to
produce the child before this Court, arrest shall not be affected by
the Police.


 

 


 

							(Jayant
Patel, J.)
 


 


 


6.5.2010						(Z.
K. Saiyed, J.)
 


 vinod

    

 
	   
      
      
	    
		      
	   
      
	  	    
		   Top