##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/6613/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/04/2026

0.3592677904611039

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 6613 of 2025

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY SD/-

==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✔

==========================================================

VED VYAS SINGH S/O ANGAD SINGH Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS MONIKA O AGRAWAL(12922) for the Applicant(s) No. 1

MR. KANVA ANTANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY

Date : 06/04/2026

JUDGMENT

1. By filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: -

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY be pleased to admit and allow this petition;

(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY be pleased to quash and set aside the F.I.R. being C.R.No. 11191028240694 of 2024 registered before the Vejalpur Police Station, Dist.: Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under sections 65(a)(a), 81 of the Prohibition Act qua the present

petitioner, in the interest of justice,

Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by RAVI SATISHKUMAR OZA(HCW0111) on Tue Apr 07 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 10 07:12:59 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/6613/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/04/2026

0.3592677904611039

(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY be pleased to grant interim relief and be please to stay further proceedings in connection with C.R.No. 11191028240694 of 2024 registered before the Vejalpur Police Station, Dist.: Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under sections 65(a)(a), 81 of the Prohibition Act qua the present petitioner till final disposal of

this petition;

(D) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY be pleased to be pleased to pass any other and further order be passed in the interest of justice.”

2. The FIR being No.11191028240694 of 2024 came to be registered with the Vejalpur Police Station for an offence punishable under Section 65(a) and 81 of the Prohibition Act. The petitioner has also been named in the FIR as an accused. Being aggrieved by the said FIR, the petitioner has approached this

Court by filing the present petition.

3. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Maulik M. Soni appearing for the petitioner. He submitted that the petitioner has not been named as an accused in the FIR. The petitioner has been sought to be implicated in the present offence only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused and except the statement of the co-accused, there is no other material connecting the petitioner with the offence in question. He, therefore, submitted to allow the present petition and

quash and set aside the FIR in question qua the present petitioner.

4. Learned APP has opposed the present petition contending that the petitioner has already been named in the FIR as an Accused No.3. The contraband liquor seized in the present case was supplied by the present petitioner to the other co-accused, and therefore, the petitioner has been rightly implicated as an accused in the present offence. He, therefore, submitted to

dismiss the present petition.

Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by RAVI SATISHKUMAR OZA(HCW0111) on Tue Apr 07 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 10 07:12:59 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/6613/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/04/2026

0.3592677904611039

5. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. At the outset, it is required to be noted that the petitioner herein has been named as an Accused No.3 in the FIR. Therefore, it is not correct on the part of the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner to contend that the petitioner has not been named as an

accused in the FIR.

6. The perusal of the FIR indicates that a combing drive was organized by the Police authorities to curb the trade of illicit liquor and as a part of the said drive, a car was intercepted by the P