MAHESHBHAI RAMJIBHAI CHAUHAN vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Court
Gujarat High Court

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 1868 of 2026

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS sd/-

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
MAHESHBHAI RAMJIBHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, LD. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS

Date : 19/05/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT
1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives
service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent –
State.
2. By way of filing the present application under Section
528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the
applicant (original accused no.11) has invoked the inherent
Page 1 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the
First Information Report bearing CR.No.11198068230274 of
2023 registered on 14.04.2023 with the Bharatnagar Police
Station, District Bhavnagar, for the offences punishable
under Sections 12(1), 12(3) and 12(4) of the Gujarat Public
Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2023, as well
as the Charge-sheet and the proceedings of the Sessions
th
Case No.64 of 2023 pending before the learned 4
Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Rathin Raval appearing for the
present applicant-accused has submitted that for the
alleged offence committed on 01.01.2012, the impugned FIR
came to be registered on 14.04.2023 (i.e. almost after a
period of more than 11 years) and the charge-sheet bearing
No.24 of 2023 came to be filed on 07.07.2023, which
culminated into Sessions Case No.64 of 2023.
4. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Raval has
Page 2 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
specifically submitted that he is not challenging the FIR so
far as the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 419,
420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 201 of the Indian Penal
Code and under Section 66(D) of the Information
Technology Act is concerned. The challenge pertains only to
the charge for the offence punishable under Sections 12(1),
12(3) and 12(4) of the Examination Act, 2023.
5. Learned advocate Mr.Raval has submitted that the
present applicant-accused is facing the charge that he had
allowed a dummy candidate, Kalpesh Bhupat Jani, to
appear on his behalf in the examination conducted on
12.02.2017 for the posts of Junior Clerk. He has further
submitted that the Gujarat Public Examination (Prevention
of Unfair Means) Act, 2023, came into force on 03.03.2023
and the examination was conducted prior to it. It is
submitted that under the provisions of Section 5 of the
General Clauses Act, statutes are presumed to be
prospective in effect unless the Legislature expressly or by
necessary implication gives them retrospective operation. He
Page 3 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
has, therefore, submitted that the applicant-accused is
protected by the fundamental rights as guaranteed under
Article 20 of the Constitution of India. Learned advocate
Mr.Raval, therefore, submits that the provisions of Sections
12(1), 12(3) and 12(4) of the Examination Act, 2023, cannot
be applied in the charge-sheet retrospectively.
6. Learned advocate Mr.Raval further submits that the
other co-accused had filed discharge applications on the
same ground before the trial court, which came to be
th
rejected by the learned 4 Additional District and Sessions
Judge, vide order dated 21.01.2016 passed in Sessions
Case Nos.64 and 66 of 2023. Being aggrieved and
dissatisfied with the said order rejecting the discharge
applications, the co-accused had preferred Revision
Application No.908 of 2026 and allied matters before this
Court, wherein a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order
dated 23.04.2026, allowed the Revision Applications by
setting aside the order passed by the trial court dated
21.01.2026, thereby discharging the applicants therein for
Page 4 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
the offences punishable under Sections 12(1), 12(3) and
12(4) of the Examination Act, 2023.
7. Learned advocate Mr.Raval has also placed reliance
upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of
Assistant Excise Commissioner, Kottayam and Others
, reported in 2021
vs. Esthappan Cherian and Another
(10) SCC 210, and has submitted that the rule or law cannot
be construed as retrospective unless it expresses or
manifests an intention to the contrary.
8. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent-State, while referring to the report submitted by
the police, has submitted that the present applicant has
allowed a dummy candidate to appear on his behalf in the
examination and the facts of the present case is similar in
nature to the facts pertaining to the other co-accused, who
are similarly situated.
Page 5 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
9. It is noteworthy that considering the same arguments,
the Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated
23.04.2026 passed in Criminal Revision Application No.908
of 2026 and allied matters, has allowed the Revisions
Applications preferred by the other co-accused, observing
thus :
“12. It is an admitted fact which becomes clear on
record is that the Examination Act had come into force
on 03.03.2023. Article 20(1) of the Constitution clearly
lays down that ‘no person shall be convicted of any
offence except for violation of a law in force at the time
of commission of the act charged as an offence’. Thus,
the offences would be of the breach of the law in force
on the date of such alleged commission of offence.
13. As referred hereinabove, the date of examination
are all prior to the Examination Act coming into force.
The law does not lay down any provision giving any
retrospective effect. As observed in the decision of the
(supra) and by way of various
Esthappan Cherian
authorities of law, no retrospective effect can be given to
the new law which affects the rights unless it express or
manifests an intention to the contrary.
Page 6 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
14. Here in the present Examination Act, there is no
such provision which conveys intention of giving a
retrospective effect to the Examination Act. It requires
mention that every act of an individual would be
governed by the current law in force at the time of such
act or activity. The law is as per the principle lex
prospicit non respicit : law looks forward not backward.
Under Indian Law, an accused person is to be arrested,
tried and punished only under the laws that were in
force on the date of the alleged offence. This principle is
a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 20(1) of
the Constitution of India known as the protection
against ex post facto laws. An act cannot be considered
as crime if it was not illegal at the time of the offence.
15. Thus, following the principles of fairness read with
Article 20 of the Constitution of India, this Court is of the
view that the invocation of the Examination Act against
all the present applicants is bad, illegal and violative of
their fundamental rights.
16. Hence, the present applications are allowed qua
the applicants herein. The order dated 21.01.2016 of
th
the learned 4 Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Bhavnagar in Sessions Case Nos.64 of 2023, 66 of
2023 is set aside. The applicants are discharged for the
Page 7 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
offences punishable under Sections 12(1), 12(3) and
12(4) of the Examination Act.”
10. This Court has taken into consideration the fact that
for the alleged offences committed on 01.01.2012, the
impugned FIR came to be registered on 14.04.2023 (i.e.
almost after a period of more than 11 years) and the present
applicant-accused was not even named in the impugned
FIR. This Court has also considered the fact that at the end
of the investigation, in the charge-sheet filed by the police,
the name of the present applicant was subsequently added
as accused no.11 and the charge was levelled for the
offences punishable under Sections 12(1), 12(3) and 12(4) of
the Examination Act, 2023.
11. It is settled that the Act in question came into force on
03.03.2023, i.e. after the registration of the impugned FIR,
and the offence was allegedly committed by the accused in
the year 2017. Indisputably, there is no specific provisions
regarding retrospective application of a statute.
Page 8 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/1868/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 19/05/2026
12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, this
Court is of the considered opinion that the present
application deserves consideration and the same is hereby
allowed.
13. The First Information Report bearing
CR.No.11198068230274 of 2023 registered on 14.04.2023
with the Bharatnagar Police Station, District Bhavnagar, is
quashed qua the present applicant only for the offences
punishable under 12(1), 12(3) and 12(4) of the Gujarat
Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2023.
14. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
sd/-
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
DIPTI PATEL..
Page 9 of 9
Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Tue May 19 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 19 21:48:30 IST 2026