The present petition has been filed by the petitioner who appears as party-in-person Shri Bhanwarlal Shankarlal Solanki under Articles 13, 16, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India as well as under sec. 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for the prayer as stated in the petition in para 6 with regard to various directions.
2. He has referred to the papers with regard to the sequence of events and various litigations filed and the orders passed by this Court from time to time. However, it is not in dispute that the son of the petitioner has been convicted for the alleged offences under sec. 366 and 376(g) of IPC by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Gandhinagar in Sessions Case No. 21/2005 against which Criminal Appeal No. 459 of 2006 and 235 of 2006 had been preferred. Both the appeals have been heard and finally disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court (K.S. Jhaveri & Z.K. Saiyed, JJ.) vide the judgment and order dated 25.8.2009. The petitioner had also, before this matter was finally disposed of, filed various applications including an application for additional evidence and the same was also disposed of.
3. Therefore, if the petitioner had any grievance, recourse can be had before the Hon'ble Apex Court against the judgment of the Division Bench. In fact, in Criminal Misc. Application No. 3490 of 2008 in Criminal Appeal No. 459 of 2006, the Division Bench of this Court (J.R. Vora & M.R. Shah, JJ.), vide order dated 25.3.2008, had also made the observation that the applicant party in person Bhanwarlal Shankarlal Solanki had appeared in that matter on behalf of his son Kapil for the relief sought in the application and the same was rejected observing that there is no power-of-attorney as the son Kapil Bhanwarlal Solanki was on bail and he could have filed the proceedings. Thereafter also Special Criminal Application No. 477 of 2012 was filed and almost similar prayers were asked for which the petition was disposed of vide order dated 2.8.2012.
4. Now, the petitioner has approached this court by the present petition for reconsideration of the papers of investigation and/or directions by this court which cannot be entertained in light of the discussion made hereinabove and the various orders passed by this Court from time to time. It may be noted that in Special Criminal Application No. 343 of 2011 also the prayers were made that his son has been falsely implicated and the petition was filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution which came to be disposed of by this Court vide order dated 3.5.2011. Therefore, at this stage, there is no reason to exercise the inherent jurisdiction under Sec. 482 of CrPC or the extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Arts. 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India as similar prayers have been considered and, in any case, the Division Bench of this Court has finally heard and disposed of Criminal Appeal No. 459 of 2006 confirming the conviction against which recourse can be had to the Hon'ble Apex Court.
Therefore, this petition cannot be entertained and deserves to be rejected and accordingly stands rejected in limine.
(Rajesh H. Shukla, J.) (hn) Top