Gujarat High Court
Nitinchandra Somnath Raval vs State Of Gujarat & on 30 March, 2017
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/SCR.A/9197/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - TO TRANSFER
INVESTIGATION TO CBI) NO. 9197 of 2016
==========================================================
NITINCHANDRA SOMNATH RAVAL....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
PARTY-IN-PERSON, PERSONAL CAPACITY for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 30/03/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. By this application under Article227 of the Constitution of India, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: 12(A) to admit and allow present petition.
(B) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing transfer of investigation of the Crime registered vide I. Cri. Reg. No.58 of 2001, at Satellite Police Station, Ahmedabad from Respondent No.2 to the Central Bureau of Investigation with a further direction for initiation of investigation forthwith & completion of the same within stipulated period.
OR to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ constituting a Special Investigation Team headed by the Senior IPC officer from CID, Crime Department of Gujarat State, accompanied with an officer of Deputy Secretary Cedar from State Urban Development Department & Superintending Engineer, Quality Control, Public Works Department, State of Gujarat to take over the investigation of the Crime registered vide I Cri. Reg. No.58 of 2001, at Satellite Police Station, Ahmedabad, from Respondent No.2. Further, the D.I.G. C.I.D. Crime, Gujarat State Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Fri Mar 31 00:49:48 IST 2017 R/SCR.A/9197/2016 ORDER may please be directed to monitor the investigation and to submit periodic report before this Hon'ble Court.
(C) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent No.1 to initiate appropriate legal action in conformity of law abide procedure against the Investigating Officers of Satellite Police Station, Ahmedabad, who have deliberately ignored their legal obligations & committed an intentional wrong.
(D) any other relief as deemed fit & just may please be granted.
2. The applicant herein in person has drawn my attention to one order passed by a coordinate bench of this Court dated 21/03/2016. The order reads thus:
1. Petitioner, partyinperson, has lost his four children amongst 98 persons in a building called Shikhar Tower at Satellite, Ahmedabad which collapsed due to alleged poor construction, and therefore, during the earthquake, which hit the State on 26.1.2001, he lost both his adult sons, daughterinlaw and a grandson.
2. It is his say that FIR came to be lodged with the Satellite police station being CR.No.I58 of 2001 where Organizer and builder, Chairman, Civil Engineer, Structural Engineer, Architect and officials of AUDA and others are arraigned as accused. The chargesheet came to be filed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural). It is his grievance that in the chargesheet, the Structural Engineer, Chief Town Planner of AUDA were shown as absconding. Other three accused, namely, Mr.Satish Shah (Organizer & Builder), Mr.Ronak Shah (Chairman) and Mr.Sanjay Shah (Civil Engineer), named in the FIR were dropped by the investigating officer without any authority. No permission was given by the State against the Chief Town Planner of AUDA Mr.Bhaumik. Therefore, application was moved for further investigation, pursuant to the submission of application by the petitioner to the Satellite police station under section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is his say that the application has been preferred requesting for monitoring of further investigation, as the investigating officer dropped the names the said Architect and Civil Engineer without any authority. The petitioner moved yet another application under section 156(3) and section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is urged that it discloses the criminal negligence and unlawful approach of the authorities. It is further his say that Special Criminal Application No.1107 of 2011 has been preferred before this Court mentioning the illegalities. The Court also had taken note of the lethargic approach of the authority. The Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Fri Mar 31 00:49:48 IST 2017 R/SCR.A/9197/2016 ORDER report was directed to be produced before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 21.7.2001. It is further his say that the report under section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure submitted on 20.10.2011 vide Exh.195 states that an attempt was made as per the say of investigating officer to trace Mr.Sanjay Shah and he was not found traceable, and therefore, the application was moved under section 156(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for monitoring of the investigation. It is urged that some of the applicants have moved for discharge. The last such date was 29.12.2015. Now, it is scheduled on 5.4.2016. According to the petitioner, he is aged. He is a victim of crime, and therefore, the monitoring of the proceedings would be at the most necessary. Therefore, he has sought the following prayers;
10. The petitioner therefore pray that:
(A) Your Lordship may be pleased to admit and allow, present petition.
(B) Your Lordship may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ to the appropriate authorities, to monitor the proceedings vide CC No.853/2001 & CC No.1560/10 before Honble Chief Judicial Magistrate Court at Ahmedabad (Rural); so as to meet the ends of justice, as expedient as possible.
(C) Your Lordship may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ to the appropriate authorities, to initiate the legal proceedings U/s. 2(C) of the Contempt of the Courts Act against Respondent No.2, herein. (D) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, your Lordships may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction to the appropriate Judicial Authority; to submit their remarks based on inspection of the proceedings pertaining to Cri. Case No.853/2001 & Cri.Case No.1560/2010 before Hon. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (AhmedabadRural). (E) Any other relief as deemed fit & just may please be granted.
3. The petitioner is heard as partyinperson at length. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1State also has made his submissions.
4. The main grievance is of nonhearing of the matter, the contempt application so also the lack of monitoring of the proceedings vide Criminal Case No.853 of 2001 and Criminal Case no.1560 of 2010 pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) with a further direction to the appropriate authority to initiate legal proceedings under section 2(C) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Page 3 of 4
HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Fri Mar 31 00:49:48 IST 2017
R/SCR.A/9197/2016 ORDER
5. It would be sufficient at this stage to direct the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) to decide all pending applications within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. It is also further being directed that the monitoring of further investigation shall be appropriately carried out to ensure that no further delay is caused. In the event of any difficulty, the petitioner is permitted to approach this Court.
With these directions, petition stands disposed of.
3. Mr. Raval invited my attention to the observations made by the Court in Para5 referred to above. I expect the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) to see that the order passed by this Court referred to above is complied with in its letter and spirit at the earliest. The applicant appearing in person is pursuing his remedies past almost more than 17 years. The order passed by this Court should be complied at the earliest.
It is always open for the applicant to come back to this Court in case of any difficulty.
4. With the above, this application is disposed of. Direct service is permitted.
The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Court concerned at the earliest.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) aruna Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Fri Mar 31 00:49:48 IST 2017