Gujarat High Court
Gautambhai Bababhai @ Shantibhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat & on 12 February, 2013
Author: K.M.Thaker
Bench: K.M.Thaker
GAUTAMBHAI BABABHAI @ SHANTIBHAI PATEL....Applicant(s)V/SSTATE OF GUJARAT R/CR.MA/12315/2012 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 12315 of 2012 ================================================================ GAUTAMBHAI BABABHAI @ SHANTIBHAI PATEL....Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR SUDHANSHU S PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MS ARCHANA RAVAL APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 12/02/2013 ORAL ORDER
Heard Mr.Patel, learned advocate for the applicant and Ms.Raval, learned APP.
The cause list shows that respondent No.2 has been sered by direct service. Though served, nobody has entered appearance on behalf of respondent No.2.
Therefore, the application is heard in absence of respondent No.2.
Mr.Patel, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the complaint has been filed in connection with two instruments, one dated 22.12.2004 and another dated 24.12.2004 said to have been drawn on Punjab National Bank. A photocopy of the said two instruments is on record at pages 38 and 39.
Mr.Patel, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not signatory to the said instruments and the said cheque has not been drawn on the account maintained by the applicant. In this view of the matter, according to the applicant, the proceedings are not maintainable. On perusal of the record, it emerges that this Hon ble Court (Coram: Hon ble Mr.Justice Rajesh H. Shukla) after hearing the applicant passed below mentioned order dated 27.8.2012:
The matter is stand over to 5th September, 2012.
Learned Advocate Mr. Sudhanshu S. Patel for the Applicant / Original Accused has requested that short date may be given, and in the meanwhile, he would make an application for adjournment before the Trial Court, which will be considered positively. Therefore, the Trial Court may not proceed till then.
Thus, since August 2012, ad-interim relief granted by the Court has remained in operation and the respondent has not entered appearance and has not opposed interim relief and any application to vacate the interim relief is also not filed. In this view of the matter, below mentioned order is passed.
RULE.
Ad-interim relief granted earlier vide order dated 27.8.2012 will continue till final hearing of the present application or till further orders. It would be open to the applicant with regard to the order which is passed in absence of the respondent.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) Bharat Page 2 of 2