Amarnath Jinkuram Vasava vs State Of Gujarat

S.H.Vora, J

By way of present application under Article 226 / 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the

petitioners have made following prayer in terms of para â€" 7(B) :-

“7(B) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned FIR registered vide Cr.No.I-74/2019 of

Chhapi Police Station, District Banaskantha u/s. 143, 147, 149, 308, 152, 153, 120B, 336, 353, 427, 506(2), 341 and 395 of IPC and u/s. 3 of the

Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act, 1984.â€​

Brief facts of the case for disposal of the present application can be stated thus :-

2.1 It is the case of the petitioners that 19.12.2019 was death anniversary of freedom fighters, Ashafaqullah Khan and Ram Prasad Bismil, for which

commemoration meeting had been organized. In addition to said meeting, a protest meeting had been scheduled against the Citizenship Amendment

Act, 2019. For the said dual purpose, petitioner no.1 and 2 made joint application dated 17.12.2019 to the Mamlatdar, Vadgam seeking permission for

organizing meeting in Chhapi Town of Vadgam Taluka, District Banaskantha. Accordingly, permission was granted to hold meeting on 19.12.2019

from 10.00 am to 17.00 pm. Subsequently, PSI, Chappi wrote letter dated

18.12.2019 to the Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate, Vadgam requesting to cancel the permission, which subsequently, came to be cancelled as

per order dated 18.12.2019 passed by Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate, Vadgam.

2.2 It is the case of the petitioner no.1 that police had come with order of cancellation of permission, but as it was very late, the petitioner did not

receive the cancellation order. According to petitioners, the petitioner no.1 and 4 who were staying at Taj Hotel in Chhapi Town, were detained early

in the morning at around 8.45 am and other petitioners were picked up from their respective homes and detained. At about 10.00 am, people started

gathering for the said meeting and as they came to know that permission for the meeting had been cancelled, they became restive. It is specific case

of the petitioners that they had no knowledge of the subsequent events that took place. Later in the evening, the petitioners came to know that an

offence had been registered against them in Chhapi Police Station.

Learned senior advocate Mr.I.H.Syed for the petitioners would submit that cancellation of permission to hold protest meeting was illegal. Not only

that the petitioners were detained in the morning around 8.45 am, whereas, alleged incident took place at about 10.00 am, while FIR has been

registered at 20.30 hrs. and there is no explanation of delay for registration of FIR. It is submitted at bar that whole of the incident happened only

because of last minute cancellation of permission granted earlier and thus, registration of FIR against the petitioners is afterthought and same has been

registered when the petitioners were under detention and they were not present at the scene of offence, at the relevant time, as shown in the FIR.

Having regard to facts of the case, and submissions made at bar, the Court is primarily concerned with quashment of FIR registered on 19.12.2019

which is at very initial and crucial stage of investigation. The submission of learned senior advocate Mr. Syed to the effect that the petitioners were

detained at 8.45 am, therefore, their presence at scene of offence at around 10.00 am is unbelievable and therefore, they are falsely involved in the

afore-mentioned offence. Though the submission is attractive, but same is without any substance for the simple reason that due to insistence of mob

gathered at the meeting place, the petitioners were released and brought at the scene of offence, since the mob already started damaging and

throwing stones on passenger bus. Such facts reflects in the FIR itself. At that stage / time, the petitioner no.2 and 4 addressed gathering and uttered

slogans despite the fact that permission was cancelled and it was well within the knowledge of the petitioner no.1. So far as detail occurrence of

incident and damage caused to the public property and obstruction created to the law enforcement agency is apparent in the FIR itself. Since the

investigation of impugned FIR is at very initial stage and as stated by learned PP Mr.Mitesh Amin that photographs and videography of scene of

offence is under analyse before FSL, but it is a matter of fact that it is specific case of the State that the petitioners were brought at the scene of

offence at the instance of the mob on account of earlier permission which was granted and later on cancelled. So at this stage, the Court is not

inclined to scrutinize minute details of occurrence right from detention to release of the petitioners and subsequent events which took place on

19.12.2019. Thus, investigation of serious offence is underway. At this stage, the petitioners have not made out a case under section 482 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure to quash the FIR, since the petitioners are prima facie found to be involved in the offence and they were very much present at

the time of occurrence of scene of offence alleged in the FIR. The present petition being devoid of merits is hereby rejected at admission stage.