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

2023 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 1203

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
GG
KIRANKUMAR TIRUPATIRAO KONDAVADASA (PATNAIK) – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent



Petitioner Advocates:MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

NEUTRAL CITATION
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 640 of 2023 [On note for speaking to minutes of order dated 21/06/2023 in R/CR.RA/640/2023 ]

With R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 642 of 2023 With R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 643 of 2023 ==========================================================

KIRANKUMAR TIRUPATIRAO KONDAVADASA (PATNAIK)

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE UNSERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Date : 05/07/2023

ORAL ORDER

1. Perused the note for speaking to minutes.

2. It appears that in 2nd line and 5th line of paragraph no.4 of order dated 21.06.2023 passed in Criminal Revision Application No.640 of 2023 with Criminal Revision Application No.642 of 2023 with Criminal Revision Application No.643 of 2023, the words

NEUTRAL CITATION
undefined
“wife of the accused” have been crept in, instead of “wife of the complainant”.

3. Hence, it is clarified that the words “wife of the accused” crept in 2nd line and 5th line of paragraph no.4 of the order dated 21.06.2023 passed in Criminal Revision Application No.640 of 2023 with Criminal Revision Application No.642 of 2023 with Criminal Revision Application No.643 of 2023 be read as ‘wife of the complainant’ instead of wife of the accused.

4. In view of above, clarification, the note for speaking to minutes is disposed of.

Registry to issue fresh writ accordingly.

(GITA GOPI,J)

Pankaj

NEUTRAL CITATION
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 640 of 2023 With R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 642 of 2023 With R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 643 of 2023 ==========================================================

KIRANKUMAR TIRUPATIRAO KONDAVADASA (PATNAIK)

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE UNSERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 MS JIRGA JHAVERI APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Date : 21/06/2023 COMMON ORAL ORDER

1. Mr. Virat G.Popat, learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant is a victim, who had claimed the Mudammal currency notes and whose application came to be allowed by order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur on 29.09.2022, which was in connection with Criminal Misc. Application No.1298 of 2022 below Exhibits-1, 7, 13 and

17 in Criminal Case No.12523 of 2022.

NEUTRAL CITATION
undefined

2. Advocate Mr. Popat for the applicant submitted that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmadabad (Rural), Mirzapur had granted the Mudammal cash of Rs.40,10,000/- on executing a bond along with surety of one and half time more than the amount shown in the panchnama and receipt of Mudammal to be executed before the concerned Police Station. Aggrieved by the said order, two accused, father of the accused and a friend of the accused, had challenged the same before the Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur by filing Criminal Revision Application Nos.138 of 2022, 148 of

2022 and 149 of 2022.

3. Advocate Mr. Popat submitted that the learned Sessions Judge by a common order on 21.04.2023 rejected the applications observing that, to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be decide as to who is the original owner of the cash property. Mr. Popat further submitted that the claim of the accused had

NEUTRAL CITATION
undefined
been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge by overturning the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate who passed an order to deposit the amount in the Fixed Deposit with an in

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top