R/SCR.A/12642/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 12642 of 2025 ============================================ KALU @ KALU TOPI SUNDARDAS TELWANI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ============================================ Appearance: MR.KISHAN PRAJAPATI(7074) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ============================================ CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 16/09/2025 ORAL ORDER Present petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Learned APP has pointed out that cognizance is already been taken. Hence, once cognizance is taken by the learned trial Court, the orders of trial Court are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in view of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhe Shyam vs. Chhabi Nath reported in (2015) 5 SCC 423. Even, this Court does not have roster under Section 482 of the CrPC / section 528 of the BNSS and hence, in view of decision in the case of Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., rendered in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No.13424/2025, as cognizance is already taken by the learned trial Court, present petition stands disposed of with liberty to file appropriate proceeding before appropriate Court under Section 528 of the BNSS. Page 1 of 3 R/SCR.A/12642/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 The powers under Article 227 of the Constitution are very much limited and as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhe Shyam vs. Chhabi Nath reported in (2015) 5 SCC 423, wherein in paragraphs 18 and 23, it has been observed as under: “18. Thus, it has been clearly laid down by this Court that an Order of civil court could be challenged under Article 227 and not under Article 226.” “23. Thus, we are of the view that judicial orders of civil courts are not amenable to a writ of certiorari under Article 226. We are also in agreement with the view of the referring Bench that a writ of mandamus does not lie against a private person not discharging any public duty. Scope of Article 227 is different from Article 226.” Considering the aforesaid fact, the order of the learned trial Courts could be challenged under Article 227 but not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Herein, the petitioners have sought the prayer to quash and set aside the impugned orders, which fall under the supervisory jurisdiction of Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhe Shyam (Supra), the judicial orders of Courts are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and jurisdiction under Article 227 is distinct from the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. At this stage it is apposite to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Garment Craft vs. Prakash Chand Goel reported in (2020) 4 SCC 181, wherein in paragraph 77 it is held that High Court does not act as a Court of first appeal while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 and to re-appreciate, re-weight evidence or fact except error apparent face on the record or perversity in findings. Page 2 of 3 R/SCR.A/12642/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025 Liberty is reserved in favor of the petitioner to replace the certified copy of annexures by producing simple copy thereof. This Court has not examined the merits of the case. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ANKIT Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 16/09/2025 18:10:00