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 3, Cited by 4]

Gujarat High Court

State Of Gujarat - For And On Behalf Of R J ... vs Dilipkumar Balkrushna Gandhi -M/S. M B ... on 22 April, 2018

Author: B.N. Karia

Bench: B.N. Karia

         R/CR.A/63/2012                               ORDER



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                             LOK ADALAT

                   R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 63 of 2012

==========================================================
      STATE OF GUJARAT - FOR AND ON BEHALF OF R J PANDYA
                            Versus
     DILIPKUMAR BALKRUSHNA GANDHI -M/S. M B GANDHI & SONS
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARDIK SONI, APP for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR ANKIT Y BACHANI(5424) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
MR RASESH H PARIKH(3862) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
MR.HEMANG H PARIKH(2628) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED(64) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

                           Date : 22/04/2018

                            ORAL ORDER

1. This Appeal is taken up for settlement in Lok Adalat.

2. This Criminal Appeal is preferred by the State of Gujarat against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patan in Criminal Case No. 5563 of 1997 dated 01.07.2009.

3. Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has appeared on behalf of the State and has produced withdrawal / settlement pursis, which is taken on record. The withdrawal / settlement pursis is signed by the authorized signatory, who is present in person before this Lok Adalat and the pursis is counter Page 1 of 3 R/CR.A/63/2012 ORDER signed by learned APP and respective learned advocates. The respondent no.1 is not present. However, respondent no.2 undertaken that whatever the fine is imposed would be honoured by respondent no.2 on behalf of respondent no.1 and for himself. Respondent no.2 has produced photocopy of his PAN card issued by the Income-tax authority, which is taken on record.

4. It is submitted that the offence alleged against the accused under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, is not serious in nature, the penalty / punishment prescribed for such offence is not substantial in view of the Sections 51 and 52 of the Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006.

5. In view of the withdrawal / compromise pursis of the parties, this Appeal stands disposed of. The respondent No. 1 is directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) and respondent no.2 is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards litigation cost, as agreed between the parties, in lieu thereof. Necessary cost be deposited in the office of the High Court Legal Service Committee within four weeks, failing which the Appeal shall stand revived automatically. Accordingly, this appeal stands disposed of.

6. However, disposal of this matter will not affect any connected matters arising out of the same, incidental or any other Page 2 of 3 R/CR.A/63/2012 ORDER proceedings, filed or to be filed before any other Court. It is also required to be noted that this order will not be treated as a precedent in any future case for reference.

(B.N. KARIA, J.) Chairman ksdarji Page 3 of 3