IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 7799 of 2022 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No NO ==========================================================

KASIM SABBIRHUSAIN KHATUDA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR IMTIYAZ I MANSURI(9159) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS VRUNDA SHAH, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)

No. 1 RULE SERVED TO CONCERNED POLICE STATION HOWEVER, SERVICE REPORT NOT FILED BY POLICE STATION for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER Date : 12/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1 The present application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the FIR registered with Vejalpur Police Station, District Panchmahals, being I-C.R. No.11207076220120 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 511 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegations in the FIR are that, at the instance of the present applicant, accused No.1 went to extort money on the ground that the caste certificates of the Deputy Sarpanch was forged, and that if the same were to be published in the newspaper, the Deputy Sarpanch would be dismissed from the said post. It further emerges from the record that accused No.1 was apprehended on the spot, and in the presence of two witnesses, namely Naranbhai Mansukhbhai Rathwa and Ganpatbhai Rathwa, accused No.1 called accused No.2, and the call was placed on speaker mode, during which the present applicant allegedly instructed accused No.2 to ask accused No.1 to reach Godhra. When accused No.1 informed that he had been caught by the villagers, the applicant allegedly responded that he had not carried out even a single task properly which had been assigned to him. With the aforesaid allegations, the FIR came to be registered, which is impugned before this Court in the present application.

2 Heard the learned advocate Mr.Imtiyaz Mansuri for the applicant and the learned AGP Ms.Vrunda Shah for the respondent-State.

3 Learned advocate Mr. Imtiyaz Mansuri submits that, as per the allegations made in the FIR, the demand for money was made by accused No.1. However, accused No.2, who is the present applicant, has been falsely implicated in the FIR. It is further submitted by the learned advocate Mr. Mansuri that, as per the allegations in the FIR, a phone call was made by accused No.1 to accused No.2. However, during the course of investigation, no Call Detail Records (‘the CDR’ referred hereinafter) have been collected by the Investigating Agency. In that background, it is contended that no material or evidence has been collected against the present applicant. Therefore, it is submitted by the learned advocate Mr. Mansuri that the impugned FIR, insofar as it involves the present applicant, is nothing but an act of harassment, and hence the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.

4 As against the same, learned APP Ms. Vrunda Shah has pointed out that though the CDRs were not collected during the course of investigation, there are witnesses who were present at the relevant point of time, namely Naranbhai Rathwa, whose statement was recorded on the same day, i.e. 13.03.2022, as well as Ganpatbhai Rathwa, who is also stated to be a witness to the offence. It is submitted by the learned APP Ms. Shah that at the instance of the present applicant, accused No.1 had gone to collect an amount of Rs.70,000/-. As per the statement made by accused No.1 before the villagers, out of the said amount of Rs.70,000/-, Rs.60,000/- was to be paid to the present applicant and Rs.10,000/- was to be retained by accused No.1. It is further submitted by the learned APP Ms. Shah that even in the absence of the CDR, considering the statements of the