ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The applicant before this Court has preferred the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the FIR being C.R.No.I – 281 of 2019 registered with Rander Police Station, Surat for offences punishable under Sections 307, 326, 325, 324, 143, 147, 148, 149, 506(2) and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The FIR if taken into consideration is into three parts i.e.

(i) in the first part it is alleged that on 10.12.2019 the injured complainant viz. Asraf @ Imtiyaz Shaikh went to Surat Court to meet his friend Vijay @ Abdul was to be brought by the policy party. At that time, on the third floor of the Sessions Court, Surat, the complainant Asraf, Nasir and Riyaz went to meet their friend Vijay @ Abdul and while they were standing in the passage at about 10 O’clock, present applicant viz. Bilal Kagzi came near the complainant and informed that the case lodged on us, if not withdrawn, your picture would come to an end and thus threatening and went away,

(ii) the second part of incident has no role to play as far as present applicant is concerned, more particularly the allegation qua inflicting injuries with weapon at the place of offence i.e. Rushabh Cross Road, near Bata Show-room and

(iii) the third part of the FIR states that the reason for present altercation is because six months back his father Imtiyaz Shaikh had some altercation and at that time Zahir Saiyed Shahnavaz @ Saddam Shahnavaz @ Shanu Aarif Party and Zakir Jamir Saiyed had physically assaulted his father Imtiyaz for which FIR was lodged before Kosamba Police Station and the said case is pending for adjudication. Therefore, the present applicant Bilal Kagzi and other accused persons had criminally conspired and have attached on his hand, legs and on head which caused him fractures. When it is at the instance of Bilal Kagzi, Zahir Saiyed, Shahnavaz @ Saddam, Saiyed Shahnavaz @ Shanu and Aarif @ Party and Zakir Jamir Saiyed all together have conspired and as per the say of Bilal Kagzi, Zahir Saiyed inflicted with sword on the head of the complainant and Shahnavaz had caught hold of the complainant and Shahnavaz @ Shanu and Aarif @ Party inflicted blows with iron pipe on his head and leg due to which complainant sustained fractures and thus complaint came to be lodged.

3.1 Learned advocate Mr.Kashyap Joshi for the applicant would submit that as soon as he came to know that he has been wrongly implicated in the alleged offence as he was not present at 10:00 O’clock as stated in the FIR, has immediately made a representation before the Commissioner of Police, Surat City on 16.12.2019 as well as to the Investigating Officer, Rander Police Station, Surat on the same day raising various contentions more particularly his absence at 10:00 O’clock as alleged in the FIR at third floor at District Court for which he had also asked the Investigating Agency to collect CCTV footage. However, it is only after the indulgence of the High Court such footages could be collected and has argued that from the said CCTV footages also the Investigating Agency stated that he was not present at 10:00 O’clock. Thus, it is argued that merely because of the advocate could not represent the present accused persons in the case, the FIR is lodged with ulterior motive to bring pressure without there being any involvement.

3.2 Learned advocate for the applicant would further submit that merely because one of the accused being represented by the present applicant, the name of the present applicant has been arraigned as an accused with an oblique motive when he has never met the complainant at the Court premises, nor was he present at the alleged place of offence and as soon as he came to know about lodging of FIR and his name being wrongly implicated, he immediately made representations as stated hereinabove. Le