Gottiparti Suresh Vireya vs State Of Gujarat on 24 March, 2021

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Gottiparti Suresh Vireya vs State Of Gujarat on 24 March, 2021

Bench: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati

       R/CR.MA/19939/2020                                                ORDER




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

      R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO.                       19939 of 2020

==========================================================
                       GOTTIPARTI SURESH VIREYA
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
JAYDEEP H SINDHI(9585) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
 for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MOXA THAKKER, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

                                 Date : 24/03/2021

                                    ORAL ORDER

1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the applicant has prayed for quashment of F.I.R. bearing C.R. No.11824006200503 of 2020 registered with Uchchhal Police Station, Tapi for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 65(e), 83 and 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicant.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.09.2020, while the police personnels were on patrolling, they received a secret information of the vehicle carrying liqour and when police authorities intercepted the vehicle Mahindra Bolero Car, bearing registration No. MH15CT4351, on carrying out the search of the said vehicle, it was found carrying Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 13 11:45:01 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19939/2020 ORDER liquor without any pass or permit. Therefore, an FIR being C.R. No.11824006200503 of 2020 came to be lodged with Uchchhal Police Station, Tapi under Sections 65(e), 83 and 98(2) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act. Therefore, the applicant has preferred the present application before this Court seeking quashment of the said FIR.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant states that the applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged offence. He also states that the applicant is named in the present offence just to extort money from the wine shop owners and therefore, there is malicious and ulterior motive to implicate the applicant in the present offence. He further states that the applicant has filed anticipatory bail application, which was withdrawn by the applicant later on. He has placed reliance upon the decision rendered by the Apex Court in case of Anjanikumar vs. State of Bihar and Others reported in 2008 (2)GLH 423. He has further relied upon the decisions rendered in Criminal Application No.16428 of 2018 dated 09.05.2019, Criminal Misc. Application No.15693 of 2013 dated 10.10.2016, Criminal Misc. Application No.11560 of 2015 dated 24.09.2015, Criminal Misc. Application No.15610 of 2013 dated 26.12.2013 and Criminal Misc. Application No.6705 of 2013 passed by the Coordinate Benches of this Court. Learned advocate for the applicant has further produced the Nokarnama dated 13.04.2019 to state that the applicant is serving as Servant.

4. Per Contra, Ms. Moxa Thakker, learned Additional Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 13 11:45:01 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19939/2020 ORDER Public Prosecutor for the respondentState has produced the police report dated 17.03.2021, which is taken on record. She has relied upon the said police report wherein it is stated that the present applicant is absconding and warrant under Section 70 of the Code is also issued against the present applicant. It is also stated that chargesheet is filed against the present applicant as well as co accused Bharatbhai Jagdishbhai Vagh. She further submits that prima facie case is made out against the present applicant on the basis of the FIR and therefore, this Court may not entertain the application.

5. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned APP for the respondentState.

6. Having heard learned advocates appearing for both the sides, as per the Nokarnama, upon which reliance is placed by learned advocate for the applicant, it appears that the applicant was appointed for the period of 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020. As per the FIR, the date of offence is 13.09.2020. The applicant has filed anticipatory bail application which was later on withdrawn by the applicant. This Court is not inclined to except the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant. More particularly, in view of the fact that the facts are disputing as much as learned APP has stated that the warrant has been issued against the present applicant and he is absconding. This Court is not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction under Section Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 13 11:45:01 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19939/2020 ORDER 482 of the Code to quash the FIR and all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid F.I.R. qua the present applicant.

7. Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed.

(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J) NEHA Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 13 11:45:01 IST 2022

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court