IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Hasmukh D. Suthar, J.
Dilip Natu Bhai Rajput - Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat & Anr. - Respondent
Special Criminal Application (Quashing) No. 12109 of 2025
Decided On : 03-09-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of conspiracy and financial fraud. (Para 3) |
| 2. petitioner claims innocence; challenges evidence presented. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court finds prima facie involvement and evidence suggesting fraud. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 4. legal standards for quashing reflect narrow review scope. (Para 10 , 12) |
| 5. final dismissal of the quashing application based on evidence. (Para 11) |
ORDER :
Hasmukh D. Suthar, J.
1) RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat.
2) By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 the petitioner has sought following relief(s):-
“(B) The Hon’ble Court may please to allow this Special Criminal Application by issuing appropriate writ, order of direction quashing and setting aside the F.I.R. No.11200019251315 under Section 465/467/468/471/406/420/120B IPC Police Station Dongri Dist. Valsaad which is placed at Annexure-D, and also please to quash the further proceeding arising thereof qua the petitioner in the interest of justice;
(C) Pending admission and till final disposal of the present application, the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant stay on execution, operation and further investigation of F.I.R. No.11200019251315 under Section 465/467/468/471/406/420/120B IPC Police Station Dongri Dist. Valsaad which is placed at Annexure-D and further proceeding arising thereof qua the petitioner in the interest of justice;
(D) pass a writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the respondent No.3 to hold an inquiry in respect of income source of the respondent No.2 of paying a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/-.”
3) The facts pertinent to the present case are as under :-
The accused persons namely Manoj Arvindbhai Shah, Tushar Arvindbhai Shah, and Tripti Arvind Shah are shown as owners in the revenue record of the property situated at Village Vaghaldhara, Taluka & District Valsad, bearing Block/Survey No. 356 admeasuring 0-98-75 Hectares-Ares-Sq. Mtrs. and Block/Survey No. 359 admeasuring 0-11-96 Hectares-Ares-Sq. Mtrs. It is alleged that these persons, by entering into a pre- planned conspiracy, prepared a Power of Attorney and a Notarized Affidavit in the name of Amit Dinesh Poda; and in connivance with Dilip Natubhai Rajput, resident of Thala, Chikhli, District Navsari i.e. the present petition and Krupal Bipinchandra Patel, carried out the process of submitting the said documents before the Revenue Office for mutation entry in the Office of Mamlatdar, despite these documents being false and illegal. In this connection, Manoj Arvindbhai Shah filed an objection solely to create legal hurdles and along with said objection produced a false registered Sale Deed No. 9440/2023, thereby deliberately creating confusion before the Deputy Collector. During the course of these illegal acts, the accused persons in collusion with each other dishonestly obtained a total sum of Rs. 1,93,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Ninety Three Lakhs only) from the complainant. Out of this, Rs. 1,85,00,000/- was taken as sale consideration – credited into the account of Dilipbhai bearing Account No.50100398138189 maintained with HDFC Bank, Chikhli Branch, and in the account of Amit Dinesh Ponda bearing Account No. 4827101001008 maintained with Canara Bank, Vesu Surat Branch, through UPI, IMPS and cash. Additionally, Rs.8,00,000/- was collected by Krupal P. Patel from the complainant towards stamp duty and registration fees. Thus, all the accused by acting together in conspiracy and collusion, prepared false and fabricated documents and produced them before the Government Offices and thereby committed criminal breach of trust, cheating, and fraud against the complainant. Therefore, the impugned complaint came to be registered being FIR No.11200019251315 of 2025, with Dungri Police Station, District Valsad, for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 406, 420 and 12
The court affirmed that prima facie evidence of a conspiracy and forgery necessitates proceeding with trial, emphasizing the narrow scope of quashing FIRs under Section 482.
Bona fide purchasers cannot be implicated in forgery or fraud where they have no part in wrongdoing, and prior allegations point to their victimization.
Point of law: Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations....
Fraudulent intent must be established for criminal liability in financial transactions, distinguishing between civil breaches of contract and criminal offenses like cheating.
Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage. Quashing of a complaint should rather be an exception and a rarity than an ordinary rule. Considering the allegations made in the c....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.