Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. Before   dealing  with  the   case   in  detail,   a  fact   is   required   to   be  noticed that this very complaint came to be brought before this Court in  the form of Special  Criminal  Application  No. 319 of 2003 for seeking  quashing   of   the   same   and   the   Hon'ble   Court   vide   order   dated  02.12.2012   was   pleased   to   allow   the   petition   with   exemplary   cost  quantified  to Rs. 10000/­. The said petition was  brought by other co­ accused   namely   Digjam   Retail   Show   Room   Shoppers   Paradise.   The  decision delivered by this Court is annexed to the petition compilation at  page 52 as Annexure 'B'.

[f] It is also emerging from the record that public analyst report  has   reflected   a   fungus   growth   and   this   report   was   very   much attached   to   the   complaint   and   therefore   on   account   of   that circumstance that fungus growth was visible is a matter of trial to  be examined in the context of provisions of the Act.

[g] It is also emerging from the record that the notice has been  given not by the petitioner dated 06.08.2002 but it has been given  by the partner of Digjam Retail Show Room Shoppers Paradise,  C.G.   Road,   Ahmedabad   and   therefore,   all   through   out   the HC-NIC Page 38 of 45 Created On Sat Sep 24 02:42:12 IST 2016 petitioners  have shielded themselves from being prosecuted  and  have waited for an opportunity  to thwart the case against them which has been visualized by filing the petition after disposal of the earlier petition. This conduct is also worth to be taken note of  while  exercising inherent jurisdiction.