Gujarat High Court
Chhaganlal Dolatam Mevada vs State Of Gujarat on 20 March, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/8553/2018 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - TO LODGE
FIR/COMPLAINT) NO. 8553 of 2018
==========================================================
CHHAGANLAL DOLATAM MEVADA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NK MAJMUDAR(430) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RC KODEKAR(1395) for the Respondent(s) No. 8
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 4
MR. MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 20/03/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
A) admit this petition;
B) issue appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to direct the for carrying out the preliminary inquiry / investigation of the untimely and unnatural death of Dharmendrasinh Khumansinh Gohil through the officers of the Central Bureau of Investigation and / or through any of the Officers of the CID (Crimes), Gandhinagar so far as the application dated 15/11/2017 of the petitioner is concerned and the preliminary investigation may kindly be ordered to carried out as prayed for above and on the basis of the same to issue appropriate direction for registration of FIR for the offence punishable under section 302 IPC against the concerned accused persons;
D) grant interim relief and by way of interim order be pleased to direct for carrying out the preliminary Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Apr 03 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 11 22:40:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8553/2018 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025 undefined inquiry / investigation of the untimely and unnatural death of Dharmendrasinh Khumansinh Gohil through the officers of the Central Bureau of Investigation and / or through any of the Officers of the CID (Crimes), Gandhinagar so far as the application dated 15/11/2017 of the petitioner is concerned and the preliminary investigation may kindly be ordered to carried out as prayed for above and on the basis of the same to issue appropriate direction for registration of FIR for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 IPC against the concerned accused persons, pending admission and final disposal of this petition;
2. The facts leading to the filing of the petition are as under:-
3. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a fair and impartial investigation into the unnatural death of Mr. Dharmendrasinh Khumansinh Gohil through the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or an officer of the CID Crime, Gandhinagar, in furtherance of an application dated 15.11.2017. 3.1. The petitioner, acting in the capacity of a whistleblower, asserts that the death of Dharmendrasinh Khumansinh Gohil, who allegedly drowned, was not accidental but homicidal in nature. The petitioner contends that Dharmendrasinh Khumansinh Gohil was deliberately killed, yet the police have failed to register an FIR for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Instead of conducting a fair and impartial investigation into Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Apr 03 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 11 22:40:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8553/2018 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025 undefined the alleged crime, the police are purportedly dissimulating the real culprits. Hence, the present petition.
4. In light of these facts, learned Advocate Mr. N.K. Majmudar, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that despite the petitioner having filed Special Criminal Application No. 8494 of 2016, and despite the order passed therein, the police have failed to register an FIR.
5. Learned APP for the respondent-State has vehemently objected to grant of the present petition and prayed to dismiss the same.
6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the record. It is observed that in Special Criminal Application No. 8494 of 2016, filed by the petitioner, the Coordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order:-
"1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has a grievance to redress as regards the inaction on the part of the police authorities in not registering the FIR pursuant to the complaint lodged by the petitioner in writing to the D.S.P., Surat, dated 05/09/2016.
2. The Police Inspector, Bardoli Police Station, Surat, shall look into the complaint at Annexure'C' and take a decision Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Apr 03 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 11 22:40:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8553/2018 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025 undefined whether the same discloses commission of any cognizable offence or not. After perusal of the complaint and inquiry, if any, the Police Inspector, Bardoli Police Station, Surat, is of the view that the same discloses commission of a cognizable offence, then, in such circumstances, the First Information Report be registered forthwith. However, if the Police Inspector, Bardoli Police Station, Surat, is of the view that no case is made out for the registration of the FIR, then, in such circumstances, the petitioner be informed in writing about the same by giving reasons in brief within a period of fortnight from today. The Deputy Superintendent of Police shall also look into the matter.
3. With the above direction, this application is disposed of. I clarify that I have otherwise not gone into the merits of the matter. Direct service is permitted."
7. In his specific findings, the Investigating Officer concluded that the deceased fell into the water canal, drowned, and subsequently expired. Consequently, the proceedings were closed. The petitioner, who seeks to refer the matter for investigation by the CBI or CID, has prima facie failed to establish any evidence on record indicating that the deceased did not die due to drowning but was, in fact, murdered. Mere conjectures and surmises on the part of the petitioner, who claims to be acting as a whistleblower, do not justify transferring the investigation to the CBI or CID. Petitioner who claimed that he has piece of evidence demonstrated that deceased had been murdered but has not been collected by Investigating Officer, failed to unravel any such evidence either Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Apr 03 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 11 22:40:50 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/8553/2018 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025 undefined before this Court or did not send/forward to the concerned officer investigating the offence or his higher officer.
8. In view of the foregoing, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present petition is frivolous, vexatious, and devoid of merit. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) MANISH MISHRA Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Apr 03 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 11 22:40:50 IST 2025