Gujarat High Court
Bava Baldevger Amthager vs State Of Gujarat on 2 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/4285/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 4285 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
BAVA BALDEVGER AMTHAGER
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
PARTY IN PERSON(5000) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. KANVA ANTANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 02/04/2026
JUDGMENT
1. By filing the present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Petitioner, Party-in-Person, has prayed for the following reliefs:
"a. Your Lordships may be please to quashed and set aside the order dated 10-3.2026, passed by the Ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijapur in Criminal Case NO. 234 of 2005;
b. Your Lordship may be pleased to kind enough to direct to allow me these two material Defence Witness-----
i. the concerned clerk who has written 31-8-1979 in column "Date" and "Vijapur" in the column "place" of this caste certificate Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by J.N. WAGHELA(HC00178) on Mon Apr 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 06 21:04:07 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4285/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026 undefined and then may kindly direct the Ld Magistrate to conduct the Criminal Proceeding after getting all the lost Original Docuents consisting of more than 200 pages in the interest of justice. So with the help of these lost documents I would examine the concerned Clerk and D.A Bava to find out the truth of the entire case.
c. The benefit of doubt may please be granted to the accused because of unexplained long delay of 45 years from the date of issuance of this caste certificate to the date of conducting this criminal proceeding in the year 2025 - 2026 by the Trial Court;
d. To direct the police through this Ld Magistrate either to file untraced report of the documents which are shown as lost or to file a closure report by the prosecution, as the case may be.
e. That any just and appropriate order may please to passed."
2. The facts and circumstances of the case giving rise to the Petition are such that the Petitioner herein is facing the trial for the offence of forgery before the learned Trial Court being Criminal Case No. 234 of 2005, pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijapur. In those proceedings, the Petitioner herein had submitted an Application vide Exh.100 seeking permission to examine the witnesses in his defence. The said Application came to be dismissed by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 10.03.2026. It is against this order, that the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Petition.
3. Heard the Petitioner, Party-in-Person. He submitted that it is the duty of the Trial Court as well as of the investigating agency to reach the truth. The investigating agency, during the course of investigation of the offence, had not Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by J.N. WAGHELA(HC00178) on Mon Apr 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 06 21:04:07 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4285/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026 undefined carried out any investigation at the office of the authority concerned by which the caste certificate was issued. The caste certificate was issued in favour of the Petitioner on 31.08.1979 i.e. 45 years ago and, as per the procedural rules, the record pertaining to the issuance of the said certificate, had been destroyed, as deposed by the witness named Mrs. Mittal Jayantilal Patel in her deposition. He further submitted that in view of the provisions of Section 159 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it was the duty of the learned Magistrate, to carry out the preliminary inquiry into the aspect of issuance of caste certificate in favour of the Petitioner. Similarly, as per the provisions of Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the investigation officer was also obliged to thoroughly investigate the aspect of issuance of caste certificate in favour of the Petitioner, and, since, no such action was taken either by the learned Magistrate or by the investigating agency, the Petitioner had submitted an application for examining certain witnesses in his defence. However, the learned Trial Court has dismissed the Application filed by the Petitioner. When this Court had drawn the attention of the Petitioner, Party-in-Person, as regards the observations made by the learned Trial Court in its impugned order about the Petitioner having expressed before the learned Trial Court, that he did not propose to examine any witness, it was submitted that the Advocate, who was present in the Court, had made him signed certain documents. The Petitioner, being ignorant of the procedure of the Court, had signed those documents, without reading them and those documents were submitted to the court. In fact the Petitioner intended to examine witness in his defence. If, the Petitioner is not allowed to examine the witness in his defence, it would be the justice, who would be the victim in the present case. He therefore submitted to allow the present Petition.
4. This Court has also heard the learned APP, who has opposed the present Petition.
Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by J.N. WAGHELA(HC00178) on Mon Apr 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 06 21:04:07 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4285/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026 undefined
5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties. The material available on record indicates that the Petitioner herein had produced a caste certificate dated 31.08.1979 issued by the Executive Magistrate, Vijapur, in his favour. On the basis of the said caste certificate issued in favour of the Petitioner, the Petitioner herein appears to have obtained an employment and subsequently, it was found that no such caste certificate has actually been issued by the Executive Magistrate. The Petitioner herein is facing trial for the said offence vide Criminal Case No. 234 of 2005 before the learned Trial Court at Vijapur. During the course of trial, after the evidence of prosecution was over, the statement of the Petitioner was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein, he had expressed his desire to examine the witnesses in his defence. From the observations made by the learned Trial Court while dismissing the Application filed by the Petitioner vide Exh.100, it appears that prior to submitting the Application Exh.100, the Petitioner had passed purshis vide Exh.94 before the learned Trial Court, declaring that he did not want to enter the witness box in his defence nor did he intend to examine any other witness in his defence and therefore, the learned Trial Court had proceeded with the trial. Thereafter, the Application Exh.100 appears to have been given by the Petitioner claiming permission to examine witness in his defence. It is submitted by the Petitioner, Party-in-Person that the signature on the purshis vide Exh.94 was obtained by an Advocate, who was present at the relevant time and since the Petitioner was not aware about the court procedure, he had signed the said document without reading it. The Petitioner, in person, argued the present Petition before this Court in fluent English and he appears to be well conversant with the court procedure. Therefore, it does not appear to be believable that he was made to sign the purshis vide Exh. 94 without reading the same. The Application at Exh. 100 appears to have an afterthought after having declared before the Court that he does not want to examine any witnesses in his defence. The learned Trial Court cannot be said to have committed any error in passing the impugned order.
Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by J.N. WAGHELA(HC00178) on Mon Apr 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 06 21:04:07 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4285/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026 undefined
6. The present Petition, being frivolous and devoid of any merit in view of the facts stated herein above, is hereby dismissed, with cost of Rs.10000/- which shall be deposited by the Petitioner before the Gujarat High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of 15 days from today.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J) J.N.W / 12 Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by J.N. WAGHELA(HC00178) on Mon Apr 06 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 06 21:04:07 IST 2026