Gujarat High Court Weekly Round Up: September 5 To September 11, 2022

NOMINAL INDEX Gulamhusen Dadamiya Pir Versus Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 368Patel Rameshchandra Mangaldas V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 369 Vithal Bogra Shetty V/S Board Of Trustees 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 370 State Of Gujarat V/S Rajeshbhai Ramubhai Patel & 5 other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 371 Sharda Chimanbhai Lalbhai V/S Dinesh Mohanbhai Prajapati 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 372 Gharshala Sanstha v/s Jayshriben Ghanshyamlal Bhatt & 5 other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 373 Ajaysinh Ghanshyamsinh Jadeja V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 374 Tushar Arun Gandhi v. State of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 375 Shivpal Singh Chaudhari V/S Central Bureau Of Investigation 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 376 Sanjay Bhulabhai Patel V/S Pankaj Vinodkumar Patni 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 377 Judgments/Orders of the week "No Material To Suggest His Involvement In Any Anti-National Activity": Gujarat High Court Quashes Passport Impounding Order Case title - Gulamhusen Dadamiya Pir Versus Union Of India Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 368 The Gujarat High Court recently quashed an order of the passport authorities impounding the passport of one, Gulamhusen Dadamiya Pir on the ground that he was engaged in some anti-national activities. It is interesting to note that the passport of the petitioner was not impounded by invoking the provisions of Section 10(3)(c) of the Passports Act, 1967, which refers to the impounding of a passport, if the holder of such passport is involved in any activities, which is against the interest of the sovereignty, integrity and the security of India.Fraudulent Power Of Attorney | Onus Of Due Diligence Before Entering Into Sale Transaction Is On Property Purchaser: Gujarat High Court Case Title: Patel Rameshchandra Mangaldas V/S State Of Gujarat Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 369 The Gujarat High Court has reiterated that the onus of performing due diligence with respect to a property before entering into any transaction is on the intending purchaser. The observation was made while deciding the anticipatory bail application moved by one such property purchaser, who was booked for Cheating under IPC, for purchasing the subject property on the basis of a fraud power of attorney. Intra-Court Appeal Not Maintainable Against Order U/Art 227 Unless Exercise Of Original Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Is Involved: Gujarat HC Case Title: Vithal Bogra Shetty V/S Board Of Trustees Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 370 The Gujarat High Court has distinguished between the right of an 'intra-court appeal' under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution and held that an intra-court appeal does not lie against the judgement of a Single Judge when the power of superintendence is exercised by examining the subordinate court's order. In other words, Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, does not permit an appeal against the order passed by a Single Judge of the Court in an Art 227 petition. Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh Joshi stated: "Where a petition is filed both under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, it will have to be considered whether the point raised in the petition arose for adjudication for the first time before the High Court. If the challenge in the petition is with respect to the points already adjudicated upon by the subordinate court or tribunal, then it will have to be held that the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court was invoked and not the original jurisdiction." Appellate Courts Must Bear In Mind There Is Prejudice In Favour Of Accused In Case Of Acquittal: Gujarat High Court Case Title: State Of Gujarat V/S Rajeshbhai Ramubhai Patel & 5 other(s) Citaiton: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 371 The Gujarat High Court, while dismissing an appeal against acquittal in a caste-based crime, reiterated that the Appellate Court has a limited scope of interfering with acquittal appeals since prejudice lies in favour of the Accused. Further, the Appellate Court can only interfere with the order of the Trial Court provided the order was manifestly unjust, perverse or contrary to law. In the instant case, Justice AC Joshi observed that there were several contradictions and omissions in the statement of the Prosecution Witnesses and notably, the complaint was registered only after 11 days for which there was no explanation. Additionally, the alleged incident had occurred with 3 persons and yet the complaint was lodged against 6 persons. All these circumtsances were factored in by the trial Court. Hence, it was clarified: "Appellate Court has full power to review, reappreciate and consider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. However, the Appellate Court must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is prejudice in favour of the accused, firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of...

Gujarat High Court Weekly Round Up: September 5 To September 11, 2022

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags