R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 1816 of 2025 ========================================================== HIREN MANSUKHBHAI BHUDARBHAI PRAJAPATI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MUKUNDKUMAR A THAKKAR(9034) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 SAURABH Y CHANDE(9035) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR HK PATEL APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 08/10/2025 ORAL ORDER By way of this application under Section 438 and 442 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS, 2023”), the petitioner – accused seeks to challenge the order dated 01/09/2025 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Patan below Exhibit-15 in Sessions Case No.19 of 2025 whereby the application seeking discharge from the offence punishable under Sections 105, 127(2), 189(2), 190 and 296(b) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS, 2023”) came to be rejected. 2. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the present revision application are that that the respondent no.2 – original complainant filed the F.I.R. bearing No.11217004240416 of 2024 with Balisana Police Station against the petitioner and others, inter-alia, alleging that the orig. accused persons; who are the students of Dharpur Medical College, in connivance with each other, have committed the R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 alleged offences, whereby the orig. accused persons done the ragging of the first year college students and allegedly, tortured them for around 3.5 hours by asking them to remain stand, sing songs and dance. It is further alleged that the orig. accused persons did not allow the first year student; who were being ragged, to go out of the room and allegedly, abused them with filthy language and tortured them mentally as well as physically for around 3.5 hours pursuant to which one student namely Anil Natvarbhai Patel died due to such torture, and thus, it is alleged that the orig, accused committed the alleged offences. 3. Upon filing of the F.I.R., the investigation commenced by recording statements of the witnesses and collected other materials which culminated into the filing of the charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Sections 105, 127(2), 189(2), 190 and 296(b) of the BNS, 2023 where the present petitioner alongwith co-accused came to be arrayed as accused in the Sessions Case No.19 of 2025. 4. In the above factual background, the petitioner–org. accused preferred an application under Section 250 of the BNSS, 2023 seeking to discharge from the array of the accused, the learned Sessions Judge, after hearing the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, rejected the said application. Hence, this revision. 5. Learned advocate for the petitioner-accused has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He has submitted that petitioner is not even remotely connected with the offence in question and, he is falsely implicated in the R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 offence in question and no prima facie case as alleged is made out against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the allegations made in the FIR which culminated into the charge-sheet are vague and general in nature. 5.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner has further submitted that petitioner has not committed any as alleged since none of the ingredients as alleged are attracted against the petitioner. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner did not do any act of ragging and did not make any force to the deceased to stand, sing, or dance and neither abused them with filthy words and nor had tortured in any manner either physically or mentally and thus no such alleged offence is committed by the petitioner and therefore, he may be discharged from the alleged offence. 5.2 Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that if the charge-sheet papers in the form of final report submitted before the learned Court concerned are examined, it does not reveal any such offence as alleged because the cause of death of the deceased is Cardio respiratory arrest following epileptic seizure. It is therefore submitted that cardiac arrest occurred due to epilepsy disease which can be said to be a natural death and not due to the tortured as alleged by the complainant. 5.3 Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that one student namely Ramesh Gujiya informed about his heart disease therefore, he was asked to sit and there was no knowledge of deceased medical condition, even without admitting the otherwise assuming anything the death of the deceased was not intentional and there was no knowledge R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 that any alleged act would likely to cause death the deceased, the ingredients of the alleged offences are clearly missing in the present. It is submitted that even otherwise considering the statement of the witness, it appears that it is stated against the applicant that the applicant was standing and gossiping was going on when 7-8 students came in group and took the introduction, thereafter, the applicant left from there. It is submitted that no witnesses state that the applicant has tortured any one or has done ragging of anyone or was part of it in any manner. It clearly thus appears that the applicant was not the part of the ragging and is not at all connected with any of the alleged offences. It is submitted that on bare perusal of entire evidences and the statement of the witnesses, it clearly appears that the applicant was not present for the entire duration of 3-3.5 hours when the ragging was being done and it appears that the applicant left from there within 15 minutes. 5.4 Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the alleged place of offence where the ragging was going on is under CCTV surveillance and perusing which it would be clear that the applicant was not at all present there for 3-3.5 hours, and therefore, no ingredients of the alleged offences has been made out qua the applicant and the applicant was not the part of the alleged offences. 5.5 By making the above submissions, learned advocate for the petitioner would submit to allow this application while quashing and setting aside the impugned order and discharge the petitioner from the alleged offence. Page 4 of 12 R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 6. On the other hand, learned APP Mr.H K Patel appearing for the respondent – State would submit that considering the allegations and charges levelled against the petitioner – org. accused, the petitioner may be put to trial as the Investigating Agency after found prima facie material against the petitioner – org. accused filed the charge-sheet and same has been culminated into registration of the Sessions Case. Learned APP while taking this Court through the reasoning assigned by the learned Court below, as also the statements of the several witnesses recorded during the course of investigation has submitted that it speaks volume as to the involvement of the petitioner-accused. 6.1 Learned APP Mr.Patel has further submitted that in the case on hand, the accused persons had, at the time of the incident, called junior students-who had arrived from Saurashtra and subjected them to acts of ragging; the said students were allegedly made to stand continuously for approximately three and a half hours and were subjected to physical and mental harassment; as a result of this alleged harassment, one student viz., Anil suddenly collapsed and was immediately shifted to a hospital for medical treatment, where he was declared dead. 6.2 It is further submitted that on perusal of the statements of the witnesses, particularly those of the victim students, it is evident as to what transpired during the incident and the manner in which physical and psychological torture was inflicted upon them. The said statements also contain explicit descriptions of the words and actions used. With a view together all the students, it is alleged that the present applicant/accused informed the other student viz., Abbas and said Abbas subsequently R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 posted a message in the juniors’ WhatsApp group, calling all the students to assemble. He would therefore, submit that prima facie it appears that the accused had played an active role in the commission of offence. 6.3 Learned APP would also submit that if the CCTV footage which has been collected, it shows that present petitioner – accused was found to be present at the location from 08:43 p.m. to 11:21 p.m., and co- accused Avadhesh arrived at 09:43 p.m. and remained there until 11:00 p.m. He would submit that a group of 15 students unlawfully assembled and formed an illegal gathering, during which the alleged act was committed. He has submitted that due to the excessive stress inflicted upon the victim, death has occurred. 6.4 Learned APP would submit that as per the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, at the time of admission, every student is required to fill a form undertaking not to engage in any form of ragging or cause any physical or psychological harm to any student which have been produced in the present case, and it is noted that both accused No.1 and accused No.2 have signed the same. 6.5 Learned APP would submit that entire investigation carried out by the IO shows sufficient material to establish the prima facie involvement of the petitioner-accused in the crime in question and on the basis thereof, the final report was submitted before the learned Court below. He would submit that material placed alongwith the final report is sufficient for framing of the charge and to conduct the trial against the petitioner – accused. Page 6 of 12 R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 6.6 Learned APP for the respondent – State while inviting the attention of this Court to the order dated 25/09/2025 rendered in respect of co- accused–Avdhesh Ashokbhai Patel who filed CR.RA No.1800 of 2025 before this Court seeking discharge from the alleged charges like the present petitioner and submitted that the said application was permitted to be withdrawn by this Hon’ble Court after arguing to some extent wherein also the order impugned in this petition is sought to be assailed. 6.6 By making the above submissions, he would submit to dismiss the present revision application. 7. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and examined the material placed on record. 8. At the outset, if the allegations made against the petitioner – org. accused is to be examined, it would appear that the petitioner – accused is charged with the following serious charges: 1. Section 105 of the BNS, 2023 pertains to punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. 2. Section 127 of the BNS, 2023 pertains to wrongful confinement. 3. Section 189 (2) of the BNS, 2023 pertains to unlawful assembly. 4. Section 190 of the BNS, 2023 pertains to every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object. 5. Section 296(b) of the BNS, 2023 pertains to Obscene acts and songs). Page 7 of 12 R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 Thus, the above charges alleged against the petitioner – accused in consonance with the statement of the witnesses and other material is examined, it appears that the offence of serious nature is alleged against the petitioner – accused where the revisional jurisdiction having limited scope seeking discharge from the alleged charges cannot be exercised. The learned Sessions Judge while dealing with the discharge application has categorically dealt with the material placed before the Court in detail and came to the conclusion that candidly role attributed to the petitioner – accused who had played a vital role together the other students sufficient to put the petitioner-accused to the trial. It also appears from the record that petitioner – accused instructed one student viz., Mr.Abbas and done message in the WhatsApp group of junior students and thereby gathered them. 9. Thus, from the narration of the above facts, as also the statements recorded during the course of investigation, as also referred too by the learned Court while rejecting the discharge application, it appears that on the basis of the material so collected in the form of statements of the witnesses cited in the charge-sheet pinches the involvement of the accused in the offence in question. The said material does reveal that there appears to be ample material at least to put the petitioner–accused to trial and therefore, considering the said aspect, the learned Court below seems to have rightly rejected the discharge application. 10. The number of contentions has been agitated by the petitioner while constraining the Court to weigh and evaluate the evidence at the R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 stage of deciding the discharge application which otherwise has a very limited scope under the revisional jurisdiction. Much has been emphasized by the petitioner that he was not having any knowledge and intention to cause death of the deceased who was not subjected to any physical cruelty or mental harassment. However, the factum as to the deceased was put under the captive condition consistently for about more than three and half hours and was subjected to wrongful confinement, which resulted into suffocation and inconvenience which led to death of the deceased can be said to be continuous act on the part of the petitioner in commission of the offence in question, which otherwise can be proved subject to leading substantial evidence as the evaluation of the same at this stage may hamper upon each stance / defence of parties hereto. 11. The argument of the learned advocate for the petitioner is that cause of death of the deceased is Cardio respiratory arrest following epileptic seizure and therefore, cardiac arrest occurred due to epilepsy, the death of the deceased can be said to be a natural death and not due to the tortured as alleged by the complainant. The said submissions again does not find any force; nor came to the rescue of the petitioner at this stage where the act on the part of the petitioner reveals that deceased was subjected to torture by putting under the captive condition for considerable long period of more than three and half hours. The possibility of cause of death as stated in the PM report viz., Epileptic seizures cannot be ruled out as resultant provocation by external factors such as stress. Because, as per case of the prosecution, the deceased was made to sit for more than three and half hours who undergone huge traumatic condition amounting to high level of stress alleged to have been R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 triggered, which resulted into cardio respiratory arrest. Of course, all these questions, which are the subject matter of evaluation and appreciation of evidence which may be led by the prosecution and cannot be answered at this stage. But, the only aspect which requires to be seen is whether the material which is placed by the prosecution warrants for trial against the petitioner – accused or not; the answer would be in affirmative. 12. Insofar as the reliance placed upon the decision of Maniklal Sahu vs. State of Chhattisgarh [2025 SCC Online SC 1960] by the learned advocate for the petitioner is concerned, the said case pertains to the considerations of the role attributed to the petitioner followed by the outcome of the testimony of the witnesses concerned as to the cause of death which was subjected therein due to cardio respiratory failure. Thus, the very decision upon which the reliance is placed by the petitioner pertaining to the testimony of the witnesses and therefore, it is clear that the testimony of the witnesses has been recorded. Whereas, on the case on hand, the trial is yet to be commenced and testimony of the witnesses are yet to be recorded and therefore, at the stage of seeking discharge, the same would not come to the rescue of the petitioner at this stage. 13. Furthermore, the CCTV footage collected by the IO during the investigation also indicates that present petitioner – accused was found to be in the vicinity of the place of offence at the time of commission of offence which speaks volume on the active participation of the petitioner – accused in the alleged offence and at this stage, the Court cannot go into to appreciate the said evidence and to decide the role of the petitioner R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 – accused in commission of the crime in question. 14. 14. Insofar as the scope to exercise the revisional power is concerned, it cannot be exercised in a routine or casual manner as the High Court has no authority to appreciate the evidence by holding a “mini trial” as has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in State Through Deputy Superintendent Of Police (supra) where the Hon’ble Apex Court after considering the decision in case of Munna Devi v. State of Rajasthan & Anr., (2001) 9 SCC 631 has held in paragraph No.75 and 76 as under: “75. In Munna Devi v. State of Rajasthan & Anr., (2001) 9 SCC 631, this Court held as under:- "3.....The revision power under the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be exercised in a routine and casual manner. While exercising such powers the High Court has no authority to appreciate the evidence in the manner as the trial and the appellate courts are required to do. Revisional powers could be exercised only when it is shown that there is a legal bar against the continuance of the criminal proceedings or the framing of charge or the facts as stated in the first information report even if they are taken at the face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence for which the accused has been charged." 76. Thus, the revisional power cannot be exercised in a casual or mechanical manner. It can only be exercised to correct manifest error of law or procedure which would occasion injustice, if it is not corrected. The revisional power cannot be equated with appellate power. A revisional court cannot undertake meticulous examination of the material on record as it is undertaken by the trial court or the appellate court. This power can only be exercised if there is any legal bar to the continuance of the proceedings or if the facts as stated in the charge- sheet are taken to be true on their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence for which the accused has been charged. It is conferred to check grave error of law or procedure.” R/CR.RA/1816/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/10/2025 15. The learned Court below has succinctly dealt with the aspect as agitated by the petitioner-accused while refusing the discharge application considering the factual as well as the legal position and this Court is in complete agreement with the said findings arrived at by the learned Court below denying the discharge application. 16. In the result, this Court does not find any substance in the present revision application. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Interim-relief, if any, shall stand vacated forthwith. (R. T. VACHHANI, J) sompura Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: MANISHKUMAR JYOTINDRA SOMPURA(HC00189), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/10/2025 14:43:05