Gujarat High Court
Anantprasad Jentilal Bhatt vs State Of Gujarat & on 6 April, 2017
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/CR.MA/8510/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 8510 of 2017
[On note for speaking to minutes of order dated 03/04/2017 in
R/CR.MA/8510/2017 ]
=============================================
ANANTPRASAD JENTILAL BHATT....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
=============================================
Appearance:
MR P B KHANDHERIA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 06/04/2017
ORAL ORDER
By this Note for Speaking to minutes, it has been pointed out that inadvertently instead of stating that the case put up by the first informant is false, it is typed the case put up by the applicant is false. In para 3 of the order passed by this Court dated 03.04.2017 in line no.12 it should be "the case put up by the first informant is false".
The Registry shall carry out necessary correction in this regard and issue a fresh writ of the order. This Note stands disposed of accordingly.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.)
Dolly
Page 1 of 1
HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:38:54 IST 2017
1 of 4
R/CR.MA/8510/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 8510 of 2017 ========================================================== ANANTPRASAD JENTILAL BHATT....Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s) ========================================================== Appearance:
MR RR MARSHALL, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR P B KHANDHERIA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA Date : 03/04/2017 ORAL ORDER 1 By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant - original accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying for quashing of the First Information Report being C.R. No.I67 of 2017 registered with the Mahila Police Station, Rajkot city for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 377 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code.
2 The first informant is a resident of Rajkot. She is a divorcee and mother of one son. In the First Information Report lodged by her, she has alleged that the applicant herein, a seventy five year old man, claiming to be an 'Astrologer' on the pretext of curing the ailment of her son, ravished her over a period of time. She has alleged allegations constituting offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:38:54 IST 2017
2 of 4 R/CR.MA/8510/2017 ORDER Code.
3 Mr. Marshall, the learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant vehemently submitted that the First Information Report lodged by the first informant is palpably false. According to the learned senior counsel, the same has been filed with an oblique motive i.e. for the purpose of extorting money. It is submitted that on the own showing of the first informant, she knows the applicant herein past almost a period of eight years. Mr. Marshall, in the course of his submissions, produced a written transcript of the telephonic conversation between the applicant and the victim. According to the learned senior counsel, the plain reading of the transcript goes to show that the case put up by the applicant is false. It also appears from the contents of the F.I.R. that the victim is talking about one more C.D., which contains a video. If I go by what has been stated in the First Information Report, then the victim should be in possession of the pictorial C.D. So far as the telephonic conversation is concerned, the C.D. is in possession of the applicant herein. If I accept or believe as true what has been stated in the transcript i.e. the telephonic conversation between the applicant and the victim, then the submission of the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant gets fortified. However, it is too early for this Court to comment anything on the transcript since the investigation is in progress. When the applicant very boldly and vociferously claims to be in a relationship with the victim over a period of time, then the Investigating Officer is obliged to collect the C.D. at the earliest so that the genuineness of the same can be ascertained through the Forensic Science Laboratory. The voice samples of the applicant herein as well as the victim can be collected and both can be subjected to a Voice Spectrography Test. So far as the C.D., which is in possession of the victim is concerned, the same should also be collected by the Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:38:54 IST 2017 3 of 4 R/CR.MA/8510/2017 ORDER Investigating Officer at the earliest. The submissions canvassed by the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant and the materials on record, do cast a prima facie doubt on the genuineness of the allegations, but I am of the view that the investigation should not be hampered and it should proceed in accordance with law.
4 I direct the Investigating Officer to immediately collect the C.D. from the applicant and forward it to the Forensic Science Laboratory for the purpose of the Voice Spectrography Test. I also direct the Investigating Officer to collect the C.D., which is in possession of the victim. The report, in this regard, will make the picture abundantly clear.
5 I am informed that the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant before the Sessions Court has been rejected. It is always open for the applicant to come before this Court and pray for anticipatory bail.
6 With the above, this application is disposed of. Direct service is permitted.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) chandresh Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Tue Aug 15 16:38:54 IST 2017 4 of 4