R/SCR.A/8223/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 8223 of 2025 ========================================================== MOHASIN @ DARBAR HASANBHAI RATHOD & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR VB MALIK(5071) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3 MS MEGHA CHITALIYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 17/06/2025 ORAL ORDER [1.0] By way of present petition under Articles 14, 19, 21, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the petitioner has sought quashing and setting aside of the FIR being CR No.11196009250138 of 2025 registered with Jawaharnagar Police Station, Vadodara City for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 296(b), 351(2) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (For short “BNS”) and section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act. [2.0] Heard learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and learned APP for respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat. [3.0] Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is falsely enroped in the offence and has nothing to do with the offence. Further, it is submitted that the petitioner at the time of incident was not present at the place of incident and has raised plea of alibi as he was elsewhere at the time of R/SCR.A/8223/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025 alleged incident. Hence, he has requested to allow the present petition. [4.0] Learned APP appearing for respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat has vehemently opposed the present petition and has submitted that FIR is filed on 26.05.2025 and therefore, investigation is at nascent stage and therefore, has requested not to entertain the present petition and has requested to dismiss the same. [5.0] Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perusing the record it appears that impugned FIR is filed at the instance of respondent No.2 wherein it is alleged that on 26.05.2025, at around 2.00 hours in the night, the present petitioner – accused No.2 and other accused persons keeping grudge of previous animosity, assaulted the complainant with kick and fist blows and in this regard, FIR is filed. However, it is the case of the petitioner that he was not present at the scene of offence on the date and time of the incident and was at some other place. However, the said defence of alibi itself is a disputed question of fact which cannot be gone into at nascent stage of investigation. [6.0] It is also appropriate to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Aryan Singh etc. reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 379 (Para 10), wherein it is held that scope under Section 482 of the CrPC is very limited and High Court cannot conduct a mini trial. The Hon'ble Apex Court in para 10 held as under:- “10. From the impugned common judgment and order R/SCR.A/8223/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025 passed by the High Court, it appears that the High Court has dealt with the proceedings before it, as if, the High Court was conducting a mini trial and/or the High Court was considering the applications against the judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court on conclusion of trial. As per the cardinal principle of law, at the stage of discharge and/or quashing of the criminal proceedings, while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court is not required to conduct the mini trial. The High Court in the common impugned judgment and order has observed that the charges against the accused are not proved. This is not the stage where the prosecution / investigating agency is/are required to prove the charges. The charges are required to be proved during the trial on the basis of the evidence led by the prosecution / investigating agency. Therefore, the High Court has materially erred in going in detail in the allegations and the material collected during the course of the investigation against the accused, at this stage. At the stage of discharge and/or while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court has a very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider “whether any sufficient material is available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not.” [7.0] In wake of aforesaid discussion, present petition being devoid of any merit stands dismissed. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the merits of the case. Present petition is dismissed in limine. (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 17/06/2025 18:58:34