VINODKUMAR NARANBHAI PATEL vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Court
Gujarat High Court

R/SCR.A/5454/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240303122024)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION)
NO. 5454 of 2024

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Sd/-
=====================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
=====================================================
VINODKUMAR NARANBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=====================================================
Appearance:
MR AR THACKER(888) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
SHIVANG A THACKER(7424) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. DIPA B ZALA(6937) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=====================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 28/10/2026
JUDGMENT
Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Hardik
Mehta waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of
respondent – State.
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner – accused
sought to quash and set aside the FIR being C.R.
No.11205044240286 of 2024 registered with Paddhar Police
Station, District: Kutch(West)-Bhuj.
Page 1 of 6
Uploaded by Raj Subhash Dhobi(HC01779) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:19 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/5454/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240303122024)
2. The facts of the case are as under:-
2.1 The land bearing Survey No. 116 and Survey No.
116/1 is situated at Village Jambudi, Taluka Bhuj, District
Kutch. Originally, the land bearing Survey No. 116 belonged to
Harijan Rama Bhoja, whose name stood mutated in the revenue
records vide Entry No. 151. Following promulgation in the year
2008 recorded vide Entry No. 2067, the tenure of the land was
converted into old tenure vide Entry No. 2139. Upon the demise
of Harijan Rama Bhoja on 27.10.2006, the names of his legal
heirs were mutated in the revenue records on 08.04.2010 vide
Entry No. 2244.
2.2 The petitioner purchased the land bearing Survey No.
116 admeasuring 3 Hectares, 42 Ares, and 97 Sq. Mtrs. from the
legal heirs of Harijan Rama Bhoja through a registered sale deed
bearing Registration No. 13458 on 07.11.2012, pursuant to
which the name of the petitioner was mutated vide Entry No.
2603, certified on 09.02.2013.
2.3 Subsequently, on 14.03.2013, the petitioner
transferred a portion of the subject land admeasuring 8,296 Sq.
Mtrs. to Shri Natwarlal Harji Bhudiya via a registered sale deed
bearing Registration No. 2907. The said parcel was assigned
Survey No. 116 Paiki 1 and mutated vide Entry No. 2626, which
was certified on 03.05.2013.
2.4 On 25.07.2014, the petitioner repurchased the said
parcel from Shri Natwarlal Harji Bhudiya by registered sale deed
Registration No. 7156, and Entry No. 2736 was certified on
Page 2 of 6
Uploaded by Raj Subhash Dhobi(HC01779) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:19 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/5454/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240303122024)
07.10.2014, making the petitioner the absolute owner of the
entirety of original Survey No. 116.
2.5 An agricultural loan was obtained on the land from
the Central Bank of India in 2023, reflecting a mutated lien vide
Entry No. 3541 certified on 22.11.2023, and the revenue
records, including Village Form Nos. 7, 12, and 8-A, stand in the
name of the petitioner.
2.6 The neighboring land bearing Survey No. 115 belongs
to Respondent No. 4, with lands bearing Survey Nos. 115, 116,
117, and adjoining parcels forming an irregular triangular
alignment. To straighten the boundaries, the adjacent owners
entered into a mutual arrangement under which boundary
adjustments were made, including exchanges and
apportionments between Survey Nos. 115, 116, and 117.
However, Respondent No. 4 preferred an application before the
Collector, Kutch, under the provisions of the Gujarat Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020, alleging that the petitioner had
encroached upon an extent of 12 Gunthas out of 2 Hectares, 27
Ares, and 64 Sq. Mtrs. belonging to Respondent No. 4 in Survey
No. 115.
2.7 Upon the matter being taken up by the Kutch District
Level Committee, the notice was issued and the petitioner's
advocate entered an appearance by filing a Vakalatnama seeking
time to produce relevant documents and defense. The District
Level Committee in Case No. 161 took a decision on 17.02.2024
to register an FIR against the petitioner. Following the
Committee’s resolution, the Resident Additional Collector and
Page 3 of 6
Uploaded by Raj Subhash Dhobi(HC01779) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:19 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/5454/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240303122024)
Member Secretary, Kutch District Level Committee, issued a
communication dated 27.03.2024 to the Superintendent of
Police, Kutch West, Bhuj, requesting the lodging of an FIR
against the petitioner.
2.8 The petitioner initially assailed the decision by filing
Special Civil Application No. 6723 of 2024 before this Court,
which was withdrawn on 25.04.2024 with liberty to file
appropriate proceedings given the direction for lodging an F.I.R
and FIR No. 11205044240286 was thereafter registered on
30.04.2024 at Paddhar Police Station, District: Kutch(West)-Bhuj
under Sections 4(3) and 5(c) of the Gujarat Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 2020.
2.9 Following arrest on 01.05.2024, the petitioner was
th
enlarged on regular bail on 04.05.2024 by the learned 5
Additional Sessions Judge & Special (Land Grabbing) Court,
Bhuj-Kutch, in Misc. Criminal Application No. 512 of 2024.
2.10 Thus, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of
this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
seeking to quash the said FIR registered against him dated
30.04.2024.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Shivang A. Thacker
appearing for the petitioner and learned APP Mr. Hardik Mehta
appearing for the respondent No.1 – State. None remained
present for respondent No.2. Order-sheet indicates that learned
advocate Ms. Dipa B. Zala representing respondent No.4 did not
remain present even on previous occasion.
Page 4 of 6
Uploaded by Raj Subhash Dhobi(HC01779) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:19 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/5454/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240303122024)
4. Essentially the offence was registered against the
petitioner on the ground that he has encroached upon the land
of Survey No.115, admeasuring 19 Gunthas, which belongs to
the complainant.
5. What is appearing from the order of the bail
application being Cr.M.A. No.512 of 2024, by which the Special
Judge, Bhuj-Kutch has enlarged the petitioner on regular bail,
that the petitioner has vacated encroached land and the learned
Special Court has recorded the following observations as under:-
"It appears from the pursis submitted at Mark-3/7 on behalf
of the applicant/accused, as well as upon taking into
consideration the complainant's statement dated 03-05-
2024, that the portion of approximately 19 Gunthas of the
land bearing Survey No. 115 situated in the limits of
Jambudi, Taluka: Bhuj, owned by the complainant, which
was encroached upon by the applicant/accused, has been
handed back to the complainant. Furthermore, as per the
special report submitted by the Investigating Officer vide
Exhibit-7, it appears that at present, the possession of the
land described in the complaint is with them (the
complainant)."
(Translated from Gujarati to English for better understanding)
6. This deciphers that as per the Report tendered by the
Investigating Officer before the learned bail Court, the land,
which was grabbed by the petitioner, possession of it has been
released in favor of the complainant. Thereby, cause of action to
file FIR has been back to square. Complainant has got back his
land, which was encroached by the petitioner.
Page 5 of 6
Uploaded by Raj Subhash Dhobi(HC01779) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:19 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/5454/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/10/2026
(GJHC240303122024)
7. In view of above, proceeding further with the FIR
would be a futile exercise. At this juncture, let rely upon the
judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana
Vs. Bhajan Lal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 . Hence, to secure
the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to quash and set
aside the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings
initiated in pursuance thereof.
8. In the result, the petition is allowed . The impugned
FIR being C.R. No.11205044240286 of 2024 registered with
Paddhar Police Station, District: Kutch(West)-Bhuj as well as all
consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are
hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioners.
9. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
Sd/-
(J.C. DOSHI, J.)
Raj
Page 6 of 6
Uploaded by Raj Subhash Dhobi(HC01779) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Oct 29 15:41:19 IST 2026