RASHMIBEN NARENDRABHAI PANDYA W/O NARENDRABHAI KRUSHNALAL PANDYA v. STATE OF GUJARAT
SCA/2944/2025 · 2026-01-30
Nirzar S Desai
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5269 (GUJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5269 (GUJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2944 of 2025 ========================================= RASHMIBEN NARENDRABHAI PANDYA W/O NARENDRABHAI KRUSHNALAL PANDYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================= Appearance : MR MIT S THAKKAR for the Petitioner. MR HENIL SHAH, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1,2,3,6 MR CHINTAN GANDHI FOR MR. SANDIP A. KAPADIYA for the Respondent No.5. NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent No.4. =========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 30/01/2026 ORAL ORDER Learned advocate Mr. Mit Thakkar, under instructions, states that at this juncture, considering the fact that the representation made by the petitioner on 25.8.2022 has still not been decided, the petitioner’s grievance would be redressed to some extent if the Court directs the respondent Nos.2 to 4 to decide the said representation as early as possible, by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law. Learned advocate Mr. Chintan Gandhi appearing for Mr. Sandip Kapadiya for respondent No.5 states that the original complainant may also be heard.
2. In view of the above, respondent Nos.2 to 4 are
directed to decide the representation made by the petitioner on 25.8.2022 in accordance with law by passing a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner by way of Speed Post. The said decision must be taken by respondent Nos.2 to 4 latest by p. 2 30.4.2026. It would be open for the original complainant to make written submissions before the respondent Nos.2 to 4 and the respondent Nos.2 to 4 are directed to consider the same while deciding the representation of the petitioner.
3. In view of the above direction, learned advocate Mr. Mit Thakkar does not press this petition at this stage with a liberty to file fresh petition in case if the representation is not favourably decided in favour of the petitioner. The petition stands disposed of as not pressed. It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the case. Notice is discharged. No order as to costs.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) SAVARIYA