SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 12473

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6610 of 2022 ==================================================

NITINBHAI GOPALBHAI RANA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==================================================

Appearance:

MS POONAM M MAHETA(11265) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. KITTY S MEHTA(7025) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR K I KAZI(5030) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3 MR.CHINTAN DAVE, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI Date : 25/08/2022

Advocates:
['POONAM M MAHETA', 'PUBLIC PROSECUTOR', 'K I KAZI', 'NOTICE SERVED BY DS']

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR)

[1] This Special Criminal Application is filed for the following reliefs:-

"9.(A) THE HON'BLE COURT may be pleased to declare the provisions of the Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020, i.e. Sections 2(d), 2(e), 4, 9, 11, 15 and 17 along with the Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Rules, 2020, as Ultra Vires to the Constitution of India being violative of Articles 14, 20, 21 and Article 254 of the Constitution of India;

(B) THE HON'BLE COURT may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the FIR registered as C.R.No.11214008220292 of

2022, in the interest of justice;

[2] The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has filed the affidavit / pursis of the petitioner wherein it is stated that he would not press the prayer 9(A). Hence, prayer 9(A) is dismissed as not pressed. In the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, namely, the petitioner and his brother along with the complainant, namely, respondent No.2. The prayer sought for in 9(B)

deserves to be granted.

[3] Both parties namely petitioner and 2nd respondent are present before the Court and they have been interacted by the Court with reference to the pursis and respective affidavits filed by them. The copy of the agreement dated 22.06.2022 entered into between the complainant second respondent and the brother of the petitioner is also placed on record and parties present before the Court are identified by their respective learned advocates and in token of having identified the parties they have produced the photocopies of the identity card issued by the statutory authorities duly countersigned by them. Same is placed on record.

[4] Mr. Chintan Dave, learned APP appearing for the respondent - State submits that since lis is essentially relating to a private property and settlement is between two private individuals the State would not have much role to play and it is left to the discretion of the Court to pass appropriate orders.

[5] Placing his submission on record and having regard to the fact that dispute having been amicably settled between the parties and subject land being a land owned by the private persons the relief sought for deserves to be granted. Hence, the following O R D E R (i) The Special Criminal Application is allowed in part.

(ii) The FIR being C.R.No.11214008220292 of 2022 registered with Bardoli Police Station (Annexure-A) and all proceedings pursuant thereto stands quashed.

(iii) Parties to bear their respective costs.

(ARAVIND KUMAR, C.J.)

(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J.)

DHARMENDRA KUMAR

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top