Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/950/2006 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 950 of 2006
=========================================
RAVIRAJSINH
MAHENDRASINH ZALA - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 4 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
Y S LAKHANI, Sr. ADV. With MR DM DEVNANI
for Applicant(s) : 1,
MS
C M SHAH, APP for Respondent(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s)
: 2 - 5.
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
Date
: 13/04/2011
ORAL
ORDER
The
petitioner has invoked Articles 14, 16, 21 and 226 of the
Constitution on the basis of alleged offences committed and
humiliation caused by respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5, who happen to be
police officers; with the prayers to direct respondent No. 2 to
register an F.I.R. against those respondents and to order
investigation of the case by C.I.D. or C.B.I. After notice being
issued herein, F.I.R. appears to have been registered in respect of
the alleged incidents vide Complaint No. 9 of 2006 in Surendranagar
City Police Station. It being registered as a complaint for
non-cognizable offence punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of
IPC, an inquiry is held and the report dated 02.07.2009 is stated to
have been submitted by the Dy. Superintendent of Police,
Surendranagar, to learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Surendranagar.
In
the above facts and circumstances, it was submitted by learned senior
advocate, Mr. Y.S.Lakhani, appearing with Mr. Devnani, that
now appropriate order is required to be made by learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar, on the basis of the aforesaid
report of the Dy. Superintendent of Police. Accordingly, it is
directed, by consent, that learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at
Surendranagaar, before whom the report dated 02.07.2009 of the Dy.
S.P., Surendranagar is filed, shall expeditiously make appropriate
order in accordance with law, after affording to the parties an
opportunity of being heard. Since the complaint of the petitioner
alleged serious offences and the aforesaid report is prima facie
inconclusive and since respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5, the accused police
officers, have not appeared before this Court in spite of service of
notice, this Court has refrained from expressing any opinion about
the allegations or the report dated 02.07.2009 and it is left to the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to make appropriate order in
accordance with law. Accordingly, the petition is disposed without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case of the parties with
the direction, as aforesaid. Rule is discharged with no order as to
costs.
[D.H.WAGHELA,
J.]
JYOTI
Top