Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J.
Chandrakant Manilal Mehta- Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat & 1 Others – Respondents
R/Special Criminal Application No. 1658 of 2017
Decided On : 29-09-2022
CRIMINAL - QUASHING OF FIR - SECTION 482 CRPC - APPLICANT CHALLENGED IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, JAMNAGAR BELOW EXH.7 IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1672 OF 2013, AND THE SUPPLEMENTARY CHARGE-SHEET DATED 21.10.2015 BEARING NO. 68A/13, FILED BY THE I/O BEFORE THE LEARNED CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, JAMNAGAR IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1672 OF 2013, INTER-ALIA, ARRAYING THE APPLICANT AND OTHER WITNESSES, AS CO-ACCUSED, TO THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 406, 420, 464, 465, 467, 471, 474, 120 (B) OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE IN THE F.I.R. BEARING C.R. NO. 346/2010 REGISTERED WITH CITY ‘A’ DIVISION POLICE STATION, JAMNAGAR. - HELD, THE APPLICANT IS ARRAIGNED AS AN ACCUSED IN ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD. MERELY AN ALLEGATION OF IMPERSONATION OF SAPNABEN (DECEASED) CANNOT BE A REASON TO ARRAIGN THE APPLICANT AS AN ACCUSED, AND MORE PARTICULARLY, IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT, SAPNABEN IN HER LIFETIME NEVER COMPLAINED OF WHATSOEVER NATURE, HER SIGNATURE AND PHOTOGRAPHS WERE MATCHED AND IF AT ALL THERE IS AN IMPERSONATION, THE APPLICANT COULD NOT HAVE ANY MENS-REA, SINCE THE AMOUNT OF ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE WAS DEPOSITED IN THE ACCOUNT OF SAPNABEN’S BANK ACCOUNT. THE ENTIRE CHAIN OF EVENTS SUGGEST THAT IT WAS PROBABLE A DISPUTE BETWEEN DECEASED SAPNABEN AND HER HUSBAND AND HER MOTHER-IN-LAW AT THE MOST. THE APPLICANT HAS SIGNED MERELY AS A WITNESS IN THE FORM AND HE WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT, HE WAS ASKED THAT THE APPLICANT WAS REQUIRED TO SIGN AS A WITNESS IN FORM-F, IN PRESENCE OF SAPNABEN’S FATHER-IN-LAW-VIRENDRA RAJA.
Fact of the Case:
THE RESPONDENT NO.2 – ORIGINAL COMPLAINANT ON 30.11.2010 LODGED THE IMPUGNED F.I.R. BEING C.R. NO. 346 OF 2010 REGISTERED WITH CITY ‘A’ DIVISION POLICE STATION, JAMNAGAR AGAINST DR. AMIT RAJA (HUSBAND OF DECEASED SAPNABEN AND ORIGINAL ACCUSED NO.1 IN THE IMPUGNED FIR) AND AGAINST ARUNDHITI BEN RAJA (MOTHER-IN-LAW OF DECEASED AND ACCUSED NO.2 IN THE IMPUGNED FIR) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE AS STATED ABOVE. THE RESPONDENT NO.2- ORIGINAL COMPLAINANT IN THE IMPUGNED FIR HAS ALLEGED THAT THE ACCUSED NOS. 1 AND 2 IMPERSONATED AND FORGED THE SIGNATURE OF THE DECEASED IN POSTAL FORM-F AND POSTAL FORM-E AND FRAUDULENTLY WITHDRAW THE AMOUNT OF RS.2,00,000/- FROM THE SENIOR CITIZEN SAVING ACCOUNT OF DECEASED JAYANTILAL DEVJI RAJA, WHEREIN, DECEASED SAPNABEN WAS THE NOMINEE. THE SAID FIR BEING C.R. NO. 346 OF 2010 IS DULY PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E.
Finding of the Court:
THE APPLICANT IS ARRAIGNED AS AN ACCUSED IN ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD. MERELY AN ALLEGATION OF IMPERSONATION OF SAPNABEN (DECEASED) CANNOT BE A REASON TO ARRAIGN THE APPLICANT AS AN ACCUSED, AND MORE PARTICULARLY, IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT, SAPNABEN IN HER LIFETIME NEVER COMPLAINED OF WHATSOEVER NATURE, HER SIGNATURE AND PHOTOGRAPHS WERE MATCHED AND IF AT ALL THERE IS AN IMPERSONATION, THE APPLICANT COULD NOT HAVE ANY MENS-REA, SINCE THE AMOUNT OF ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE WAS DEPOSITED IN THE ACCOUNT OF SAPNABEN’S BANK ACCOUNT. THE ENTIRE CHAIN OF EVENTS SUGGEST THAT IT WAS PROBABLE A DISPUTE BETWEEN DECEASED SAPNABEN AND HER HUSBAND AND HER MOTHER-IN-LAW AT THE MOST. THE APPLICANT HAS SIGNED MERELY AS A WITNESS IN THE FORM AND HE WAS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT, HE WAS ASKED THAT THE APPLICANT WAS REQUIRED TO SIGN AS A WITNESS IN FORM-F, IN PRESENCE OF SAPNABEN’S FATHER-IN-LAW-VIRENDRA RAJA.
Issues: None
Ratio Decidendi: None
Final Decision: THE SUPPLEMENTARY CHARGE-SHEET DATED 21.10.2015 BEARING NO. 68A/13 SUBMITTED BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER BEFORE THE LEARNED CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, JAMNAGAR ARRAYING THE APPLICANT AS CO-ACCUSED, QUA THE PRESENT APPLICANT, IS QUASHED. ACCORDINGLY, CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1672 OF 2013 STANDS TERMINATED QUA THE PRESENT APPLICANT. THE CRIMINAL CASE BE CONTINUED QUA REST OF THE ACCUSED PERSONS.
JUDGMENT :
1. By way of the present application, the applicant herein has challenged the impugned order dated 29.06.2015 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Jamnagar below Exh.7 in Criminal Case No. 1672 of 2013, and the supplementary charge-sheet dated 21.10.2015 bearing No. 68A/13, filed by the I/O before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Jamnagar in Criminal Case No. 1672 of 2013, inter-alia, arraigning the applicant and other witnesses, as co-accused, to the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 464, 465, 467, 471, 474, 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code in the F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. 346/2010 registered with City ‘A’ Division Police Station, Jamnagar.
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present application read thus:
2.1. The respondent no.2 – original complainant on 30.11.2010 lodged the impugned F.I.R. being C.R. No. 346 of 2010 registered with City ‘A’ Division Police Station, Jamnagar against Dr. Amit Raja (husband of deceased Sapnaben and original accused no.1 in the impugned FIR) and against Arundhitiben Raja (mother-in-law of deceased and accused no.2 in the impugned FIR) for the offences punishable as stated above. The respondent no.2- original complainant in the impugned FIR has alleged that the accused nos. 1 and 2 impersonated and forged the signature of the deceased in Postal Form-F and Postal Form-E and fraudulently withdraw the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from the senior citizen saving account of deceased Jayantilal Devji Raja, wherein, deceased Sapnaben was the nominee. The said FIR being C.R. No. 346 of 2010 is duly produced at Annexure-E.
2.2. On completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer (IO) submitted charge-sheet on 14.03.2013 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar against the accused nos. 1 and 2 for the aforesaid offences as stated above. Pursuant to the submissions of the charge-sheet, Criminal Case being No. 1672 of 2013 came to be registered against the accused nos. 1 and 2 and process came to be issued.
2.3. On issuance of process, the original complainant – respondent no.2 herein filed an application below Exh.7 on 05.06.2013 praying for further investigation of offence under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and for arraigning the present applicant and other office bearers of the Postal Department as co-accused in the alleged offences.
2.4. The learned Magistrate by the impugned order dated 29.06.2015 allowed the application below Exh.7 filed at the instance of the respondent no.2 and by the said order, the learned Magistrate directed the Superintendent of Police (S.P.) to further investigate the alleged offence against the proposed accused and submit an additional report within a stipulated time. The said order is duly produced at Annexure-I. Pursuant to the impugned order dated 29.06.2015 passed by the learned Magistrate, Jamnagar, the investigating officer filed a supplementary charge-sheet on 21.10.2015 in Criminal Case No. 1672 of 2013 arraigning the applicant and other office bearers of the postal department as co-accused to the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 464, 465, 467, 471, 474 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
2.5. Being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar below Exh.7 dated 29.06.2015 and the supplementary charge-sheet dated 21.10.2015 filed by the investigating officer before the learned Magistrate, Jamnagar in Criminal Case No. 1672 of 2013, the applicant herein has preferred the present application seeking the following reliefs:
B. That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned Supplementary Charge-sheet dated 21.10.2015 bearing No. 68A/13, filed by the Investigation Officer before the Court of L
The court affirmed that criminal proceedings cannot be used as leverage in civil disputes, emphasizing the need for proof of dishonest intent and necessary ingredients for offences claimed. Lack of v....
The court established the principle that continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law when the accused had already been exonerated in the departmental enquiry o....
Section 409 IPC deals with criminal breach of trust by public servant or by banker, merchant or agent.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
