Gujarat High Court
Janakbhai Gordhanbhai Bhakodia vs State Of Gujarat on 28 July, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18062/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18062 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
JANAKBHAI GORDHANBHAI BHAKODIA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HIREN M MODI(3732) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR BHARGAV PANDYA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
UNSERVED REFUSED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 28/07/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to quash the First Information Report Page 1 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:26:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18062/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2023 undefined (FIR) bearing No.II-C.R.No.83 of 2014 registered with Dhari Police Station, District : Amreli for the offence punishable under Section 507 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. It is the case of the prosecution that Respondent No.2 i.e. original complainant, namely, Jayeshbhai Jivrajbhai Jethva was the friend of the present applicant - original accused. Complainant is Member of Dhari Gram Panchayat. On 31 st October, 2014, when he was at his house at around 23.14 hours, he received call from Parvez @ Pallu mentioned in the FIR. When he picked up the phone, one Tinubhai Laliya had talked with him and besides Tinubhai, namely, Janakbhai Gordhanbhai was using abusive language to the complainant. At that time, said Tinubhai and Parvez restrained him for using abusive language against the complainant. The aforesaid conversation was recorded in his mobile. With the aforesaid allegation, the FIR came to be filed on 1st November, 2014.
3. Today, when the matter was called out, learned APP, Mr.Bhargav Pandya, places on record the Report submitted by Page 2 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:26:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18062/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2023 undefined Investigating Officer, namely, Mr.J.J.Chaudhari, Police Inspector, Dhari Police Station, dated 28.07.2023. It is mentioned in the Report that on recording the fresh statement of the complainant, he stated that now, there is no grievance survives and he does not want to proceed further and given the consent to quash the FIR against the present applicant. The Report is ordered to be taken on record.
4. Mr.Hiren Modi, learned advocate for the applicant submits that on plain reading of the FIR, there was no any ingredients for attracting provision under Section 507 of the IPC was made out. Mr.Modi, learned advocate further submitted that there was a dispute between the present applicant and Police Sub Inspector, Mr.Koladra, who belongs to the same cast as of the complainant, who is having good relations with the complainant. The said Police Officer came into house of the applicant on 1.11.2014 in the morning and when the applicant was not in the house, they had insulted to the parents and pushed the aged mother and resultantly, she was fallen down.
Page 3 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:26:42 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18062/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2023 undefined
5. Mr.Modi, learned advocate further submits that there was a collusion with the complainant and the Police Inspector and therefore, this false FIR came to be filed without having supporting material to the allegation. Mr.Modi, learned advocate further submits that for attracting provision under Section 507 of IPC, there should be intimidating to the complainant by the present applicant, which is missing in the present case as there was no any specific words mentioned. Mr.Modi learned advocate further submitted that phone number which was mentioned in the FIR, does not belong to the present applicant and there is no conversation with complainant and the present applicant as alleged in the FIR. Mr.Modi, learned advocate further submitted that in fact there is a political rivalry between the present complainant and applicant as the complainant wants to be a Member of Gram Panchayat. Mr.Modi, learned advocate further submits that FIR is filed with mala-fide and malicious intention and with ulterior motive to harass the applicant and therefore, he prays to quash and set aside the FIR.
Page 4 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:26:42 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18062/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2023 undefined
6. Mr.Bhargav Pandya, learned APP for the State submits that though statement of the complainant was recorded and he was instructed to appear but as he is not interested in proceeding further, he does not appear. Mr.Pandya, learned APP submitted that in view of the statement recorded by the Investigating Officer dated 25.7.2023, appropriate order be passed.
7. Considering the submissions made by learned advocates for the respective parties, it transpires that for attracting the provision of Section 507 of IPC, the essential which are required as under:
(1) That the accused committed the offence of criminal intimidation;
(2) That he did so by an anonymous communication or having taken precaution to conceal the name and abode of the person from whom the threat comes.
Page 5 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:26:42 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18062/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2023 undefined
8. An offence under Section 503 of IPC has following essential:
1. Threatening a person with any injury;
(i) to his person, reputation or property; or
(ii) to the person, or reputation of any one in whom that person is interested.
2. The threat must be with intent;
(i) to cause alarm to that person; or
(ii) to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat; or
(iii) to cause that person to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat.
9. In the present case, there is not a whisper in the complaint that the alleged criminal intimidation administered by the present petitioner had caused any alarm to the complainant and he actually felt very threatened. In addition to that, plain reading of the FIR reveals that the words "abusive language" was only Page 6 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:26:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/18062/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2023 undefined used. (બી ભત્સ ભ ષા ). There is no specification regarding any criminal intimidation made by the applicant threatened to cause any alarm to the complainant.
10. In view of the above circumstances, this Court is of the view that this case is fully covered in the categroies (a) and (e) mentioned by the Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and others V/s. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others reported in (1992) Supp. (1) SCC 335. Therefore, application requires to be allowed.
11. For the reasons stated herein above, the present application is allowed. Impugned FIR being No.II-C.R.No.83 of 2014 registered with Dhari Police Station, District : Amreli for the offence punishable under Section 507 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as well as other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule made absolute.
(M. K. THAKKER,J) ASHISH M. GADHIYA Page 7 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:26:42 IST 2023