• Associate Sponsor

Gujarat HC recalls its 2-year-old order quashing FIR in land dispute case in Kheda

The court had quashed the FIR against Salim Shaikh following an out-of-court settlement with his father Haji Usmangani Abdulrehman Shaikh.

By: Express News Service | Ahmedabad | Published: March 19, 2016 2:21 am

In a rare case, the Gujarat High Court has recalled its more than two-year-old order which had quashed an FIR in connection with a case of land dispute involving a father-son duo in Kheda district. The court has also issued a showcause notice to the son, stating that why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against him.

The court had quashed the FIR against Mohammad Salim Shaikh following an out-of-court settlement with his father Haji Usmangani Abdulrehman Shaikh. However, the son after relief from the High Court approached district collector, and also filed a suit in a lower court claiming the ownership of the same land. The dispute is related to a piece of land which is registered in the name of Usmangani. In 2013, he filed a complaint with Balashinor police station, Kheda district, against his son Salim accusing him of forging documents and mutating the ownership of the land.

Share This Article
Share
Related Article

Salim moved the High Court pleading to quash the FIR. In October 2013, single bench of Justice A J Desai quashed the FIR after the father-son duo gave written undertakings that they have sorted the dispute amicably, and don’t want to pursue the case. Subsequently, Justice Desai ordered to quash the FIR.

A year later, Usmangani approached the High Court and filed a contempt of court plea against his son. The concerned court directed him to approach the single judge bench (justice Desai) which had quashed the FIR. Last week, Justice Desai allowed Usmangani’s petition seeking recall of the order which had quashed the FIR against his son.

Justice Desai stated in his order, “prima facie, I am of the opinion that respondent no.2 (Salim) has committed breach of civil contempt as defined under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India.” He also issued notice to Salim “as to show cause why proceedings under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act should not be initiated.”

For all the latest Ahmedabad News, download Indian Express App

  1. No Comments.