Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.C. DOSHI, J.
Kamlesh Ramjilal Sharma - Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Misc. Application (For Quashing & Set Aside Fir/Order) No. 7205 of 2014
Decided On : 06-03-2025
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Prohibition Act - Sections 66(b), 65(A),(E), 116
(B), and 81 - Application to quash FIR for offences under Prohibition Act - Court held that statements of co-accused are relevant for investigation, even if inadmissible in evidence - Dismissed petition to quash FIR at initial stage of investigation. (Paras 1, 6, 12)
(B) Evidence Act - Section 10 - Co-accused statements can guide investigation but are inadmissible at trial - Court emphasized that admissibility is determined post-investigation. (Paras 6, 10)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to quash an FIR registered for offences under the Prohibition Act based solely on the statement of a co-accused, arguing that such evidence is inadmissible. The FIR was filed after illegal liquor was found abandoned, leading to the arrest of a co-accused who named the petitioner.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the investigation was at an initial stage and that the statement of the co-accused could be used as a clue for further investigation, thus the FIR could not be quashed at this stage.
Issues: The main issues were whether the FIR could be quashed based solely on the inadmissibility of the co-accused's statement and the relevance of such statements during the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that statements of co-accused, while inadmissible at trial, are relevant for guiding the investigation, and quashing the FIR at this stage would be premature.
Result: Petition dismissed.
ORDER :
J. C. DOSHI, J.
1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being I-C.R.No.5075 of 2014 registered with Gomtipur Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences under Sections 66(b), 65(A),(E), 116(B) and 81 of the Prohibition Act and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. The facts narrated in the petition are stated as under:
2.1 On 16.03.2014, ASI of Gomtipur Police Station had received secret information that opposite Santoshinagar, besides Dera Dhulabhai Patel Chali, one loading rickshaw and one Car were lying abandoned, wherein, illegal foregin liquor was found. Thus, FIR was filed. During interrogation of one Vikramshinh who was arrested, had given name of the petitioner. Thus on the basis of his statement, name of present petitioner is disclosed.
3. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is falsely involved in the offence on the basis of statement of co-accused recorded during investigation. It is submitted that that during investigation of FIR, arrested accused has given name of present petitioner and thus, name of the petitioner has been arraigned in the FIR. It is submitted that statement of co-accused is inadmissible in evidence and therefore, on such inadmissible evidence, putting accused for trial would be futile exercise and therefore, while relying on following judgments, it is submitted to quash the proceedings.
(a) Vijaybhai Dhuralal Soni v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.5483 and 5596 of 2000]
(b) Dalpatsinh Shersingh v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.7167 of 2000]
(c) Dhansukhbhai Baalwantrai Modi v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.9542 of 2004]
(d) Girish H Trivedi v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.5776 of 2004]
(e) Shri Ishwarbhai Becharbhai Ahir v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.14106 of 2006]
(f) Kailash Govindram Rathi v/s. State of Gujarat [2008 (1) GLR 750].
(g) Dalpatsinh @ DS Shersinh Rathod v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.4449 of 2008]
(h) Darshrathbhai Mahaji Marvadi v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.15155 of 2013]
(i) Nareshbhai Devchansbhai Patel v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.2276 of 2014]
(j) Dilipsinh Kishorbhai Rathod v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.17096 of 2015].
(k) Santoshsinh Narendrasinh Chauhan v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.489 of 2015]
(l) Darshrathbhai Mangaji Marvadi v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc.Application No.8528 of 2017]
(m) Chaudhari Ranjitbhai Harishingbhai v/s. State of Gujarat [Criminal Misc. Application No.12622 of 2020]
5. Per contra, learned APP for respondent State submitted that FIR is at initial stage and during investigation of FIR, accused was arressted, in his statement, he has given name of petitioners as supplier of liquor or liquor to be supplied to him. In this circumstances, statement of co-accused is relevant in proceeding further in investigation of offence. Therefore, he submits that FIR at this stage should not be qaushed and investigating officer should be permitted to collect further evidence on record.
5.1. Upon above submissions, it is submitted to dismiss the petition.
6. Having heard learned advocates for the parties and perusing record, it is undisputed that name of the petitioner is revealed from the statement of co-accused who has been arrested by IO in regard to investigation of aforesaid FIR. It is undisputed that statement of co-accused is not admissible in evidence. It is required to be appreciated that investigation was at initial stage and it was to be initiated to proceed further on the basis of statement of co-accused. Allegations and averments made in the complaint since found supported from statement of co-accused, FIR cannot be quashed even before investigation is c
Statements of co-accused, while inadmissible at trial, are relevant for guiding initial investigations, and FIRs cannot be quashed solely on this basis.
Statements of co-accused, while inadmissible at trial, can guide initial investigations and do not warrant quashing of FIRs at the preliminary stage.
Statement of co-accused is relevant under Section 10 of Evidence Act for the purpose of carrying out further investigation – At initial stage of registration of FIR and starting of investigation on t....
Statements of co-accused are relevant for investigation but not admissible as evidence; FIRs cannot be quashed at the initial stage based solely on such statements.
Statements of co-accused can be used as clues for investigation; quashing FIR at initial stage is not permissible.
Statements of co-accused can guide investigations and cannot be dismissed at the pre-trial stage; FIRs should not be quashed unless no cognizable offence is disclosed.
Statements of co-accused are relevant for investigation and do not warrant quashing of FIR at the initial stage; admissibility is determined later.
Co-accused statements are relevant for investigation but inadmissible as evidence; FIR cannot be quashed at the initial stage based solely on such statements.
Statements of co-accused can guide investigations but are not sufficient for quashing an FIR at the initial stage of proceedings.
Statements of co-accused can be used as clues for investigation; FIR cannot be quashed at the initial stage without material evidence.
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
