Pravinbhai Bhaktibhai Patel vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 February, 2025

0
101

Supreme Court – Daily Orders

Pravinbhai Bhaktibhai Patel vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 February, 2025

Author: Rajesh Bindal

Bench: Rajesh Bindal

                                                       1



                                         IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION



                                   CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.        OF 2025
                                       (@ SLP(CRL.) No.18378/2024)


                         PRAVINBHAI BHAKTIBHAI PATEL & ORS.                 APPELLANT(S)




                                                              VERSUS


                         THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.                       RESPONDENT(S)




                                                   O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. A chargesheet has been filed, arraigning the appellants

for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149,

354, 323, 294(b), 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

and 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w) and 3(2)(va) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989.

3. The case against the appellants is that they arrived at

the place of occurrence and committed the aforementioned

Signature Not Verified
offences while abusing the respondent – defacto
Digitally signed by

complainant.

SWETA BALODI
Date: 2025.03.04
17:00:18 IST
Reason:

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit

that there is a prior civil suit inter se the parties.
2

The appellants are in actual possession and enjoyment of

the suit property, which is the alleged place of

occurrence. As a counterblast to the suit filed by the

appellants, a complaint has been filed at the behest of

the complainant. Even on an earlier occasion, the private

respondent’s wife had given a complaint invoking the very

same provisions against some other accused persons, which

has been quashed on consent. The private respondent has

also given similar complaints, whenever he has got any

grievance.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that

upon investigation, it was found that a case has been

made out. The allegations being a matter for trial, there

is no need for interference to the impugned judgment.

6. Despite notice being issued and served, none appears for

the contesting respondents.

7. We are of the considered view that continuing the

proceedings against the appellants would amount to a

travesty of justice.

8. Admittedly, the appellants have filed a suit which is

pending consideration. The present complaint has been

filed subsequent to the said suit. We are quite conscious

of the fact that mere pendency of the civil suit can

never be a bar to the initiation of criminal proceedings.

However, the place of occurrence itself is the disputed
3

property over which, both the sides are claiming rights.

On the facts of the case and especially, after going

through the averments made in the First Information

Report, we are of the view that it is nothing but a civil

dispute between the parties. Perhaps, that is the reason

why the contesting respondent has chosen to not appear

before this Court.

9. In such view of the matter, we have no hesitation in

setting aside the impugned order. Accordingly, the FIR

No.11209041240461 of 2024, and the entire proceedings

arising out of it, stand quashed.

10. The appeal is allowed accordingly.

11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

……………………………………………………J.
[M.M. SUNDRESH]

……………………………………………………J.
[RAJESH BINDAL]

NEW DELHI;

24th FEBRUARY, 2025
                                   4



ITEM NO.42                 COURT NO.8               SECTION II-B

               S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)   No(s).    18378/2024

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-07-2024
in SCRA No. 6876/2024 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at
Ahmedabad]

PRAVINBHAI BHAKTIBHAI PATEL & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. Respondent(s)

Date : 24-02-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Aniket Seth, Adv.

Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, AOR

For Respondent(s) Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, Adv.

Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR
Mr. Rishi Yadav, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R

Leave granted.

The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(SWETA BALODI)                                  (POONAM VAID)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                        ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

(Signed order is placed on the file)

[ad_1]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here