SHAH KAMLESH RAMSAKALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/SCR.A/3254/2026                                  JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

       R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - TO LODGE
                  FIR/COMPLAINT) NO. 3254 of 2026


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
==========================================================

                Approved for Reporting               Yes           No

==========================================================
                           SHAH KAMLESH RAMSAKAL
                                    Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANKIT V DIXIT(10019) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ARUNKUMAR L AAHIR(10173) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. MEET THAKKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY

                                 Date : 09/03/2026

                                    JUDGMENT


1.       By filing the present Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of                the
Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”) the Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

         “(i)     issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order
         or direction to the respondents to register an FIR herein to proceed with
         the written complaint lodged on Dt. 5/07/25 a part of negligence given
         by the petitioner, in accordance with law; Mark As Annexure-A.

         (ii)     pending admission and / or final disposal of this petition,
         appropriate direction be issued to the respondents herein to produce the
         relevant papers of investigation carried and action on a part of

                                      Page 1 of 4
      R/SCR.A/3254/2026                                       JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




          negligence – out so far with an appropriate report to this regard;

          (iii)    Departmental inquiry against Police Inspector,

          (iv)     pass such orders as thought fit in the interest of justice.”

2.        The facts and circumstances giving rise to the filing of the present Petition are
such that, the son of the Petitioner was studying in the Government Polytechnic
College at Ahmedabad. He was aged about 18 Years. In February 2025, a study tour
was organized by the institution, wherein, the son of the Petitioner had also
participated.     On 18.02.2025, the son of the Petitioner and his co-students were
bathing in the river, during which, the son of the Petitioner slipped and drowned in the
river and died. The Petitioner herein, thereafter, submitted an application to the
concerned police authorities for registering an offence against Respondent Nos. 4 to 9
herein. The concerned police authorities carried out the inquiry into the accidental
death and submitted the report with regard to the same to the Superintendent of Police
Ahwa, Dang.

2.1       Being aggrieved by the action on part of the police authorities in not
registering the offence, the Petitioner is before this court by filing the present petition.

3.        Learned Advocate Mr. Ankit V. Dixit appearing for the Petitioner submitted
that it was sheer negligence on part of Respondent Nos. 4 to 9 herein, which had
resulted into death of the son of the Petitioner, and therefore, a cognizable offence of
negligence had been clearly made out against them, and therefore, the offence ought
to have been registered against them by the concerned police authorities. He therefore
submitted to allow the present Petition and direct the police authorities to register an
offence in this regard against Respondent Nos. 4 to 9 herein.

4.        Learned APP has opposed the present Petition contending that the death of the
son of the Petitioner was merely an accident and no aspect of any criminality is
involved in the present case. He further submitted that, along with the son of the


                                          Page 2 of 4
      R/SCR.A/3254/2026                                     JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




Petitioner, the other students were also bathing in the river, and no other casualty,
except the son of the Petitioner, had taken place. He also submitted that, during the
inquiry into the accidental death of the son of the Petitioner, it was revealed that the
son of the Petitioner was bathing away from the place, where the other students were
bathing and he was calling the other students near him and, when he was standing on
one of the rock of the river, his leg slipped and he drowned. He therefore submitted
to dismiss the present Petition.

5.        Heard learned Advocates for the parties. From the material available on
record, it appears that, pursuant to the death of the son of the Petitioner on
18.02.2025, the inquiry into the accidental death was carried out by the concerned
police authorities under the provisions of the BNSS, more particularly, Section 194.
During the course of the said inquiry, the police authorities had recorded the
statements of the fellow students and the staff members of the institute, who had
accompanied the students to the study tour. The inquiry so carried out, revealed that
the death of the son of the Petitioner was absolutely accidental. It is not even the case
of the Petitioner that his son was forcibly made to bath at a particular place in the
river. From the material available on record it appears that all the other students were
bathing together at a place in the river, and from there, the son of the Petitioner had
gone elsewhere and he was standing on a rock at that place and was calling his fellow
students to accompany him. However, during the process, he slipped and fell down
into the river and drowned. From the perusal of the material available on record, this
Court is not in a position to find any aspect of criminality being involved in the
matter.

6.        It is argued by learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner that Respondent
Nos. 4 to 9 herein being the Teachers and other staff members of the institute, had
remained negligent in performing their duties which had resulted into the death of the
son of the Petitioner.

6.1       Even if this argument is accepted as it is, mere negligence on their part would


                                         Page 3 of 4
     R/SCR.A/3254/2026                                                           JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




not make them liable for criminal prosecution.

7.       Under the circumstances, no case is made out for exercising discretion in
favour of the Petitioner. Hence, the Petition stands dismissed.


                                                                                        (M. R. MENGDEY,J)

J.N.W / 127




 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
 Digitally signed by: JAYANTILAL NARAYAN WAGHELA(HC00178), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 11/03/2026 11:31:06




                                                     Page 4 of 4