The court highlighted the necessity for a thorough evaluation of evidence before rejecting a discharge application, emphasizing that mere suspicion without substantial proof is insufficient for prosecution.

JUDGMENT :

J.C. DOSHI, J.

1. I proposed to decide captioned petitions by this common judgment and order, as they are pertaining to selfsame FIR having involved similar issue.

2. In Criminal Misc. Application No.12202 of 2012 filed u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , the petitioners claimed following relief:-

a. call for the record and proceedings of court of Criminal Case No.62/2012 of the court of JMFC, Patdi and examine the same;

b. quash and set aside the order passed by the learned J.M.F.C. Patdi, dated 05/06/2012 below Exh. 56 in Criminal Case No.62/2012. Exh. 56;

c. allow Exh.56 preferred by the accused-applicants Criminal seeking discharge in Special Case No. 62/2012 pending in the Court of Ld. JMFC, Patdi and discharge the accused revisionists;

d. pending admission and/or final disposal of this application, further proceedings of Criminal Case No.62/2012 pending in the Court of Ld. JMFC, Patdi, be stayed;”

The petitioners of aforesaid petition are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 3 in the FIR and accused Nos.5 to 7 in the charge sheet.

2.1 In Criminal Misc. Application No.16100 of 2012 filed u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , the petitioner claimed following relief:-

“a. Call for the record and proceedings of Court of Criminal Case No. 62 of 2012 of the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patdi and be further pleased to allow discharge application.

b. Quash and set aside the impugned order passed on 23rd October 2012 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhangadhra in Criminal Revision Application No. 12 of 2012.

c. Pending admission and final disposal of this application, further proceedings of Criminal Case NO. 62 of 2012 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Patdi, be stayed.”

The petitioner of aforesaid petition is arraigned as accused No.5 in the FIR and accused No.9 in the charge sheet.

2.2 In Special Criminal Application No.2744 of 2013 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner claimed following relief:-

b. Be pleased to quash and set aside the FIR lodged with Patdi Police station being CR No.I 0039/2010 as well as consequential proceedings arising out of the said complaint qua the present petitioner.

c. Be pleased to quash and set aside order passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Dhangadhra dated 29.06.2013 in Criminal Revision Application no. 16 of 2012 and the order passed below Exh. 54 in Criminal Case No. 62 of 2012;

d. Be pleased to allow Exh. 54 preferred by the accused applicant seeking discharge in Criminal Case No. 62 of 2012 pending in the court of Ld. JMFC, Patdi;

The aforesaid petitioner is not named in the FIR, however, arraigned as accused No.3 in the charge sheet.

2.3 In Special Criminal Application No.3647 of 2013 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , the petitioner claimed following relief:-

a. to transfer the investigation to CBI or any other higher police agency of CID Crime, in