Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Suo Motu vs Yatin Narendra Oza on 30 September, 2020

Author: Sonia Gokani

Bench: Sonia Gokani, N.V.Anjaria

          R/CR.MA/8120/2020                                    ORDER



            N THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


             R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 8120 of 2020


==========================================================
                                   SUO MOTU
                                     Versus
                              YATIN NARENDRA OZA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS NISHA M THAKORE(3293) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. KRUTI M SHAH(2428) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================


     CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
            and
            HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA


                                Date : 30/09/2020


                                 ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI)

1. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 28.09.2020, the report of the three Judges' Committee has already been placed on record along with the affidavit of the Registrar General, High Court of Gujarat. A copy of the same has also been shared with the learned Advocate, Ms. Kruti Shah.

Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 01 21:14:45 IST 2020

R/CR.MA/8120/2020 ORDER

2. Learned Sr. Advocate, Mr. Rashesh Oza, has joined today, as learned Sr. Advocate, Mr. Datar, and learned Sr. Advocate, Mr. Joshi, are unable to join on account of their engagements, elsewhere. It is conveyed by learned senior advocate Mr.Datar through learned Sr. Advocate, Mr. Rashesh Oza, that "We did not attempt truth as defence. We have not invoked Section 13 (b) of the Contempt of Courts Act. We have merely stated that our allegations and grievances were not made in the air and were not baseless. This would not mean that the truth as a defence has been invoked."

3. According to the learned Sr. Advocate, Mr. Shalin Mehta, the truth was, in fact, invoked as defence, and therefore, the order dated 29.09.2020 reflects the said aspect. However, it is for the respondent to decide and change his stand.

4. Without opining anything, we deem it appropriate to record, what has been conveyed and post this matter for order on 5 th October, 2020, since, both the sides have chosen to conclude their arguments and not to adduce any further evidence/ submissions.

5. S.O. to 5TH OCTOBER, 2020.

Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 01 21:14:45 IST 2020

           R/CR.MA/8120/2020                          ORDER



                                            (SONIA GOKANI, J)




                                                (N.V.ANJARIA, J)
MISHRA AMIT V./UMESH




                              Page 3 of 3


                                            Downloaded on : Thu Oct 01 21:14:45 IST 2020