MANISH GOPALDAS SHAHversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

   R/CR.RA/202/2018                             JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026




IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY
            SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 202 of 2018


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
        Approved for Reporting              Yes      No
                                                      √
==========================================================
                     MANISH GOPALDAS SHAH
                              Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SANJAY PRAJAPATI(3227) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SM DERASARI(5321) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MONALI BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                           Date : 30/04/2026
                            JUDGMENT

[1.0] By way of present revision application under Section 397 read with
Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”),
the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside of the order
dated 21.04.2017 passed below Exh.3 by the learned Judge, Court No.20,
City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No.78/2017 and to allow
the application Exh.3 which was filed under Section 227 of the CrPC
seeking discharge.

[2.0] Heard learned advocate Mr. Sanjay Prajapati appearing for the
applicant and learned APP Mr. Monali Bhatt for the respondent – State of
Gujarat.

[3.0] The brief facts of the case are that, the complainant on 11.04.2008



                                Page 1 of 4
   R/CR.RA/202/2018                               JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026




at about 10.45 a.m. was standing at Ellisbridge Junction while traffic
signal was red and at the same time, the applicant – accused was also
allegedly standing at the signal in his Skoda Octivia Car and when the
signal got on, complainant was going towards Gandhi Road for going to
his shop and at that time, the applicant – accused drove his car rashly and
negligently and the complainant apprehended that the applicant was
going to hit the complainant with his car and therefore, the complainant
stood on the side of the road of Ellisbridge and the applicant passed
from near the complainant however, the applicant’s car did not hit the
complainant and no injury was caused. However, the complainant did not
file the complaint on that day till 06.08.2011 i.e. after 30 months the
complainant filed the FIR being I-CR No.318/2011 with Ellisbridge Police
Station, Ahmedabad City against the present applicant for the offence
under Section 307 of the IPC. After investigation, charge-sheet came to
be filed which culminated into Sessions Case No.78/2017. The applicant –
accused filed an application Exh.8 under Section 227 of the CrPC seeking
discharge which came to be rejected by the learned Additional City
Sessions Judge. Hence, present revision application is filed.

[4.0] Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties and going through the record, it appears that the complainant –
respondent No.1 herein has filed the FIR in connection with the alleged
incident which took place on 11.04.2008 at about 10.45 a.m. while the
complainant was standing at Ellisbridge Junction as traffic signal was red
and at the same time, the applicant – accused was also allegedly standing
at the signal in his Skoda Octivia Car and when the signal got on,
complainant was going towards Gandhi Road for going to his shop and at
that time, the applicant – accused drove his car rashly and negligently
and the complainant apprehended that the applicant was going to hit the
complainant with his car and therefore, the complainant stood on the
side of the road of Ellisbridge and the applicant passed from near the


                                 Page 2 of 4
   R/CR.RA/202/2018                              JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026




complainant however, the applicant’s car did not hit the complainant and
no injury was caused. However, the complainant did not file the
complaint on that day till 06.08.2011 i.e. after 30 months the
complainant filed the FIR being I-CR No.318/2011 with Ellisbridge Police
Station, Ahmedabad City against the present applicant for the offence
under Section 307 of the IPC. The allegation against the applicant is that
the complainant is having suspicion or doubt that the applicant keeping
grudge of earlier offence which was committed by the applicant –
accused in the year 2006 has tried to hit the complainant with his car.
However, it has come on record that in connection with the said earlier
offence, the applicant has been discharged.


[5.0] Perusing the investigation papers and allegations levelled in the
complaint, it transpires that no one has sustained any injury and even
otherwise the FIR is filed after 30 months of the alleged incident under
suspicion that the applicant keeping grudge of earlier offence, of
collection of ransom by the present applicant, registered against him had
tried to hit the complainant with his car. Except this, there is no any
material or an iota of evidence to show that there was any intention on
the part of the applicant – accused to cause death or hurt to the
complainant and there is no any material which establishes mens rea or
involvement on the part of the present applicant and merely based on
suspicion, the FIR is filed and it is needless to say that mere suspicion
however strong may be can never take place of proof. In view of above,
in absence of any legal evidence or material merely based on suspicion,
FIR is filed against the applicant more particularly keeping grudge of
earlier offence wherein the applicant – accused has already been
discharged by the concerned Court.

[6.0] Further, the concept of discharge in criminal jurisprudence
operates as a constitutional safeguard, ensuring that no individual is


                                 Page 3 of 4
    R/CR.RA/202/2018                                                          JUDGMENT DATED: 30/04/2026




compelled to undergo the burdens of a criminal trial unless the
prosecution first meets the minimal judicially-recognisable threshold of a
prima facie case. Considering the concept of fair trial and safeguard
provided under the Code reveals through investigation papers that no
prima facie offence is made out and once offence is not made out and
charge levelled against the applicant – accused is found groundless, in
that event, it is the duty of the Court to see to it that the applicant is not
put to any harassment and such trial is nothing but sheer wastage of
judicial time and it is unjust to continue the prosecution against such an
accused.


[7.0] In wake of aforesaid conspectus, present revision application is
allowed. Impugned order dated 21.04.2017 passed below Exh.3 by the
learned Judge, Court No.20, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case
No.78/2017 is hereby quashed and set aside qua the present applicant –
MANISH GOPALDAS SHAH and application Exh.3 filed by the applicant
is hereby allowed and the applicant herein is discharged from the
charges for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Record &
Proceedings, if any, be returned back to the concerned Court. Direct
service is permitted.


                                                                                                              Sd/-
                                                                   (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
   Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
   Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 30/04/2026 14:53:36




                                                   Page 4 of 4