Disposed

Hiteshkumar Sureshbhai Jadav (Zapadiya) v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC14 Jul 2020SCR.A/9418/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special Criminal Application filed for directions to police authorities to provide safety protection. The Court observed that granting police protection is within the police's discretion. It dismissed the petition after instructing the police station to consider the petitioner's prayer at their cost.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; police station informed to consider the prayer for protection.

Hiteshkumar Sureshbhai Jadav (Zapadiya) Vs State… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Gujarat HC (2020)

¶1

R/SCR.A/9418/2019 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 9418 of 2019

¶4

================================================= HITESHKUMAR SURESHBHAI JADAV (ZAPADIYA) Versus

¶5

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶6

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

¶7

Appearance:

¶8

MR ANVESH V VYAS(5654) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR VIJAY H NANGESH(3981) for the Respondent(s) No. 4 NOTICE NOT RECD BACK(3) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 MS MAITHILI MEHTA APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶9

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

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER

¶11

Date : 14/07/2020

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

Heard Mr.Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioner, Ms.Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 – State and Mr.Nangesh, learned advocate for respondent No.4 through Video Conferencing.

¶14

By way of present petition under Articles 14, 16, 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has prayed to direct respondents No.2 and 3 to ensure all steps to provide the safety and protection to the petitioner from any probable threat or criminal act from respondent No.4.

¶15

Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that there is constant threat from the side of respondent No.4 to

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

R/SCR.A/9418/2019 ORDER

¶18

the petitioner and he was threatened in the police station and, therefore, the present petition has been filed for necessary direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to ensure all steps to provide the safety and protection to the petitioner. He has submitted that some order may be passed in favour of the petitioner, otherwise, the police authority may not pay heed to the request of the petitioner.

¶19

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 – State has submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the case and filing of the FIR, the time of almost ten months has been passed and there is no eminent danger to the petitioner, the present petition may be dismissed.

¶20

Learned advocate for respondent No.4 has submitted that the present petition has been filed only to get police protection. He has submitted that even after filing of the complaint, no untoward incident has happened and his client is not giving any threat to the petitioner. He has submitted that considering the facts of the present case, the petition may be dismissed.

¶21

Considering the submissions of both the sides and considering the materials placed on record, it appears that the petitioner has approached the concerned police authority for taking certain action and to give him police protection.

¶22

At this juncture, it is required to be observed that it is discretion of the concerned police authority to grant the

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

R/SCR.A/9418/2019 ORDER

¶25

police protection to the person concerned and if circumstances so arise, the police authority can provide police protection to the person concerned.

¶26

Generally, no direction can be issued to the police authority directing it to provide police protection. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the police authority may consider the prayer of the petitioner for providing him police protection in case of situation so arises, that too at the cost of the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶27

In view of the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of. Let the concerned police station be informed accordingly.

¶28

(A. P. THAKER, J)

¶29

VR PANCHAL / SINDHU NAIR

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Hiteshkumar Sureshbhai Jadav (Zapadiya) v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hiteshkumar Sureshbhai Jadav (Zapadiya) v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjaybhai Channubhai Prasad Vs State of Gujarat

Dineshbhai Panchiyabhai Vasava through Jayaben Dineshbhai Vasava Vs State of Gujarat

John Somadin Fernandiz Ubah Vs State of Gujarat

Pratapbhai Shivubha Solanki Vs State of Gujarat

Ramabhai Simabhai Rathwa Vs State of Gujarat

Prabhubhai Kanabhai Koli Vs State of Gujarat