Gujarat High Court
Lilawatiben W/O Murlidhar Soni vs State Of Gujarat on 28 July, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET
ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 6877 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
================================================
LILAWATIBEN W/O MURLIDHAR SONI & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================
Appearance:
MS KIRAN VARMA for MR BHUNESH C RUPERA(3896) for the
Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR KAMLESH KACHHAVAH(3013) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR ROHAN SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 28/07/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 (the Code) is filed by the applicants praying to quash
and set aside the FIR being C.R. No. 11191008201178 dated
25.10.2020, registered with Chandkheda Police Station, District:
Page 1 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 498A,
323, 294(b) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and
Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, for the offence
which took place between 09.12.2013 to 25.10.2020, which has
culminated into Criminal Case No. 3443 of 2021, pending before
the competent Court at Gandhinagar.
2. When the matter is taken up, none is present on behalf of the
respondent No. 2 – de facto complainant. The matter is of 2022 and
trial Court proceedings are stayed since 28.04.2022. Hence, the
Court proceeded with the matter, on merits.
3. The allegations qua the applicants are to the effect that the
applicant Nos. 1 and 2, who are the mother-in-law and the father-
in-law, and the applicant Nos. 3 and 4, who are the sisters–in-law
(Nanand), of the respondent No. 2 used to taunt her on the count
that she has brought a very meager dowry and thereby, used to
physically and mentally torture her. Another allegation is that the
applicant No. 1 – mother-in-law also beat the respondent No. 2,
whereas, the applicant No. 2 abetted her by giving filthy abuses. It
is also alleged that the applicant Nos. 3 and 4, who are married
sisters-in-law of the respondent No. 2 used to instigate the
applicant Nos. 1 and 2 against the respondent No. 2 for bringing
meagre dowry. Thus, the allegations against the applicants are
that they beat, used abusive language, and physically and
mentally tortured the de facto complainant. On the said facts, FIR
Page 2 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
in question came to be lodged against the applicants.
4. Heard, learned advocate for the applicants and the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent – State.
4.1 The learned advocate for the applicants would submit that
the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 are senior citizens, whereas, the
applicant Nos. 3 and 4 are the sisters-in-law (Nanand) of the
respondent No. 2 who were married in the year 2013 and 2007,
respectively, and thus, on the date of filing of the FIR they were
residing separately at Ahmedabad in their respective matrimonial
homes with their in-laws and thus, the present FIR is nothing but a
pressure tactic and with a view to see that the entire family is
implicated in a false crime.
4.2 It is further submitted that the applicants are falsely
implicated in the offence in question and the allegations made
against them are totally vague and false without there being
anything on record to suggest specific role and/or overt act
committed by them.
4.3 The learned advocate for the applicants would submit that
there is an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR inasmuch as the
period shown in the FIR is between 2013 and 2020, for which, no
plausible explanation is forthcoming on record.
Page 3 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
4.4 It is further submitted that so far as applicant Nos. 3 and 4 –
sisters-in-law of the respondent No. 2 are concerned, they being
residing at their respective matrimonial homes, have nothing to do
with the offence in question so also with the day-to-day affairs of
the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 or the husband of the de facto
complainant inasmuch as, they rarely and occasionally visit their
paternal home at village: Didwana, District: Nagaur, Rajashthan
and thus, the allegations against them are completely false and
fictitious.
4.5 It is further submitted that prior to filing of the present FIR,
the respondent No. 2 had preferred an application before the
concerned police station, however, she did not lodge any
substantive FIR and thus, she is in habit of making such false
complaints inasmuch as, while the applicant Nos. 3 and 4 are the
married daughters, the applicant Nos. 1 and 2, who are the
parents-in-law, were also residing separately from their son –
husband of the de facto complainant, which fact can be
substantiated from a Public Notice dated 27.03.2020, a copy of
which is produced at Annexure ‘C’ to this application, wherein, it
is specifically informed that his (applicant No. 2’s) son, the
husband of the respondent No. 2, has a habit of drinking; is doing
nothing and threatening the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 and also, sold
off their belongings and that, they disown their son declaring that
he (son) has no rights over their property and that, the applicant
No. 2 is not responsible for the acts of his son. The learned
Page 4 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
advocate for the applicants would further submit that the
applicant No. 2 had also filed an application before the Didwana
Police Station against his son on the aforesaid allegations and that,
he is residing separately from them for last 3-4 years and the SDM,
Didwana was also asked to take actions under Section 107 and
116(3) of the Code against him.
4.6 Making above submissions, it is submitted that present
applicants have no role to play in the alleged offence and the FIR
against the applicants having been filed with mala fide, it is
requested to be quashed.
5. As against that, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
the respondent – State would submit that Charge-sheet qua in the
case has already been filed and prima facie case is made out and
hence, present application seeking quashment of the FIR in
question and the criminal case pursuant thereto, may not be
entertained at this stage.
5.1 It is submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor
that surfing through the evidence collected during the
investigation, would amount to a mini trial and this Court, while
considering an application for quashing under Section 482 of the
Code, may not conduct a mini trial.
5.2 Making such submissions, it is urged by the learned
Page 5 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
Additional Public Prosecutor that this application may not be
entertained and it is requested to be rejected.
6. Heard, the learned advocates for the parties present and
perused the papers available on record.
6.1 At the outset, it would be apt to refer to a decision in case of
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604, wherein, the
Hon’ble Apex Court crystallized seven distinct, illustrative
categories of cases where judicial intervention under Section 482 of
the Code or Article 226 of the Constitution is necessitated to secure
the ends of justice and clip any abuse of the process of Court. The
relevant portion of Paragraph 102 of the said judgment is extracted
below:
“(1) Where the allegations made in the First Information Report
or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and
accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence
or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations ins the F.I.R. and other materials, if
any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence,
justifying an investigation by police officers under S.156(1) of the
Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of
S.155(2) of the code.
(3) Where, the uncontroverted allegations made in the F.I.R. or
complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not
disclose the commission of any offence and make out the case
against the accused.
Page 6 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
(4) Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a
cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no
investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a
Magistrate as contemplated under S.155(2) of the Code.
(5) Whether, the allegations made in the F.I.R. or complaint are
so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no
prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is
sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where, there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the
provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and/or where
there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act,
providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved
party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with
malafide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with
an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with
a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”
6.2 The applicants have preferred this application under Section
482 of the Code, seeking the quashing of the First Information
Report (FIR) and all consequential proceeding in pursuance
thereto. The allegations against the present applicants are beating,
abusing and taunting with regard to meager dowry as well as
general allegations and to abet the offence.
6.3 Before adverting to the case on hand, it would be
appropriate to refer to a decision of the Apex Court in Preeti
Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, 2010 (0) AIJEL-SC 48656, wherein the
Court held:
Page 7 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
“28. It is a matter of common knowledge that unfortunately
matrimonial litigation is rapidly increasing in our country. All the
Courts in our country including this Court are flooded with
matrimonial cases. This clearly demonstrates discontent and
unrest in the family life of a large number of people of the society.
29. The Courts are receiving a large number of cases emanating
from Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code which reads as
under:-
[“498-A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting
her to cruelty.-Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the
husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be
punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three
years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation.-For the purposes of this Section, cruelty’ means:- [(a)
any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the
woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life,
limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or ][(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a
view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any
unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on
account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such
demand.”]
]
30. It is a matter of common experience that most of these
complaints under Sec. 498-A IPC are led in the heat of the
moment over; trivial issues without proper deliberations.
We come across a large number of such complaints which
are not even bona fide and are led with oblique motive. At
the same time, rapid increase in the number of genuine cases
of dowry harassment are also a matter of serious concern.
31. The learned members of the Bar have enormous social
responsibility and obligation to ensure that the social fiber of family
life is not ruined or demolished. They must ensure that exaggerated
Page 8 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
versions of small incidents : should not be reflected in the criminal
complaints. Majority of the complaints are led either on their
advice or with their concurrence. The learned members of the Bar
who belong to a-noble profession must maintain its noble traditions
and should treat every complaint under Sec. 498-A as a basic
human problem and must make serious endeavour to help the
parties in arriving at an amicable resolution of that human
problem. They must discharge their duties to the best of their
abilities to ensure that social fiber, peace and tranquility of the
society remains intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure
that one complaint should not lead to multiple cases.
32. Unfortunately, at the time of ling of the complaint the
implications and consequences are not properly visualized by the
complainant that such complaint can lead to insurmountable
harassment, agony and pain to the complainant, accused and his
close relations.
33. The ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and
punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To find out the truth is
a herculean task in majority of these complaints. The tendency of
implicating husband and all his immediate relations is also not
uncommon. At times, even after the conclusion of criminal trial, it
is difficult to ascertain the real truth. The Courts have to be
extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints
and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing
with matrimonial cases. The allegations of harassment of husband’s
close relations who had been living in different cities and never
visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided
would have an entirely different complexion. The allegations of the
complaint are required to be scrutinized with great care and
circumspection. Experience reveals that long and protracted
criminal trials lead to rancour, acrimony and bitterness in the
relationship amongst the parties. It is also a matter of common
knowledge that in cases led by the complainant if the husband or
the husband’s relations : had to remain in jail even for a few days,
it would ruin the chances of amicable settlement altogether. The
process of suffering is extremely long and painful.
Page 9 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
34. Before parting with this case, we would like to observe that a
serious relook of the entire provision is warranted by the
legislation. It is also a matter of common knowledge that
exaggerated versions of the incident are reflected in a large number
of complaints. The tendency of over implication is also reflected in
a very: large number of cases.
35. The criminal trials lead to immense sufferings for all
concerned. Even ultimate acquittal in the trial may. also not be able
to wipe out the deep scars of suffering of ignominy. Unfortunately
a large number of these complaints have not only flooded the
Courts but also have led to enormous social unrest affecting peace,
harmony and happiness of the society. It is high time that the
legislature must take into consideration the pragmatic realities and
make suitable changes in the existing law. It is imperative for the
legislature to take into consideration the informed public opinion
and the pragmatic realities in consideration and make necessary
changes in the relevant provisions of law. We direct the Registry to
send a copy of this judgment to the Law Commission and to the
Union Law Secretary, Government of India who may place it
before the Hon’ble Minister for Law & Justice to take appropriate
steps in the larger interest of the society.”
6.4 Further, in the decision in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam v.
State of Bihar, 2022 (0) AIJEL-SC 68351, the Apex Court observed
that:
“12. Before we delve into greater detail on the nature and
content of allegations made, it becomes pertinent to mention
that incorporation of section 498A of IPC was aimed at
preventing cruelty committed upon a woman by her husband
and her in-laws, by facilitating rapid state intervention.
However, it is equally true, that in recent times,
matrimonial litigation in the country has also increased
significantly and there is a greater disaffection and friction
surrounding the institution of marriage, now, more thanPage 10 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
ever. This has resulted in an increased tendency to employ
provisions such as 498A IPC as instruments to settle
personal scores against the husband and his relatives.
13. This Court in its judgment in Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs.
State of U.P. & Anr., (2018) 10 SCC 472 has observed:-
“14. Section 498-A was inserted in the statute with the
laudable object of punishing cruelty at the hands of husband
or his relatives against a wife particularly when such cruelty
had potential to result in suicide or murder of a woman as
mentioned in the statement of Objects and Reasons of the
Act 46 of 1983. The expression ‘cruelty’ in Section 498A
covers conduct which may drive the woman to commit
suicide or cause grave injury (mental or physical) or danger
to life or harassment with a view to coerce her to meet
unlawful demand. It is a matter of serious concern that large
number of cases continue to be led under already referred to
some of the statistics from the Crime Records Bureau. This
Court had earlier noticed the fact that most of such
complaints are led in the heat of the moment over trivial
issues. Many of such complaints are not bona fide. At the
time of ling of the complaint, implications and consequences
are not visualized. At times such complaints lead to uncalled
for harassment not only to the accused but also to the
complainant. Uncalled for arrest may ruin the chances of
settlement.”
14. Previously, in the landmark judgment of this court in
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr., (2014) 8 SCC 273 it
was also observed:-
“4. There is a phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes
in recent years. The institution of marriage is greatly
revered in this country. Section 498-A IPC was introduced
with avowed object to combat the menace of harassment to a
woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The
fact that Section 498-A IPC is a cognizable and non-bailable
offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst thePage 11 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by
disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the
husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a
quite number of cases, bed- ridden grandfathers and grand-
mothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for
decades are arrested.”
15. xxx
16. 16. In Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of UP & Anr.,
(2012) 10 SCC 741 it was observed:-
“21. It would be relevant at this stage to take note of an apt
observation of this Court recorded in the matter of G.V. Rao
vs. L.H.V. Prasad & Ors. reported in (2000) 3 SCC 693
wherein also in a matrimonial dispute, this Court had held
that the High Court should have quashed the complaint
arising out of a matrimonial dispute wherein all family
members had been roped into the matrimonial litigation
which was quashed and set aside. Their Lordships observed
therein with which we entirely agree that: “there has been an
outburst of matrimonial dispute in recent times. Marriage is
a sacred ceremony, main purpose of which is to enable the
young couple to settle down in life and live peacefully. But
little matrimonial skirmishes suddenly erupt which often
assume serious proportions resulting in heinous crimes in
which elders of the family are also involved with the result
that those who could have counselled and brought about
rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being arrayed
as accused in the criminal case. There are many reasons
which need not be mentioned here for not encouraging
matrimonial litigation so that the parties may ponder over
their defaults and terminate the disputes amicably by mutual
agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law where it
takes years and years to conclude and in that process the
parties lose their “young” days in chasing their cases in
different courts.” The view taken by the judges in this matter
was that the courts would not encourage such disputes.”
Page 12 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
17. Recently, in K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana, (2018)
14 SCC 452 it was also observed that:-
“6. The Courts should be careful in proceeding against the
distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial
disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband
should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations
unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime
are made out.”
18. The above-mentioned decisions clearly demonstrate that this
court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse
of section 498A IPC and the increased tendency of implicating
relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without
analysing the long term ramifications of a trial on the complainant
as well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said
judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus
allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left
unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore,
this court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from
proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when
no prima facie case is made out against them.
6.5 Tested on the various pronouncements of the Apex Court as
above, if the case on hand is adverted, following aspects emerge:
a) the allegations against the applicants are vague and
omnibus;
b) the ingredients of the offences alleged are not satisfied qua
the applicants inasmuch as the complainant alleged that all accused
harassed her physically and mentally on meagre dowry and beat,
and abused her, but no specific and distinct allegations have beenPage 13 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
made against either of the appellants herein, i.e., none of the
appellants have been attributed any specific role in furtherance of
the general allegations made against them so far as qua alleged
offence, more particularly, offence punishable under Section 498A
of the IPC. This simply leads to a situation wherein one fails to
ascertain the role played by each accused in furtherance of the
offence.
c) similar allegations of harassment and demand for dowry
made in the FIR, however, without there being any specific
instance;
d) it is trite that small and scattered incidents without any
immediate proximity do not constitute offence of cruelty;
e) the contents of the FIR itself, does not repose confidence so
far as allegations qua present applicants are concerned inasmuch as
the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents-in-law of the de facto
complainant whereas, the applicant Nos. 3 and 4 are the sisters-in-
law. All the applicants were residing separately from the husband
of the de facto complainant as while applicant Nos. 3 and 4
indisputably got married in the year 2007 and 2013, respectively,
the Public Notice, referred to herein above, shows that the applicant
Nos. 1 and 2 were also stayed separately and that, they had
disowned their son. Not only that, the applicant No. 2 had also
filed an application against his son, a copy of which is on record;
Page 14 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
f) no ingredients of offence alleged appear to have been
satisfied in the facts and circumstances of the case so far as
applicants are concerned;
g) in K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana, (2018) 14 SCC
452, it is held that the Courts should be careful in proceeding
against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial
disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not
be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific
instances of their involvement in the crime are made out.”
6.6 In view of the above, taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of the case vis-a-vis the aforesaid decisions of the
Apex Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
present case squarely falls within the parameters (1), (3), (5) and (7)
as enshrined in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra) as the proceedings
against the present applicants appear to be manifestly frivolous
and instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance
and accordingly, the Court is inclined to exercise powers vested
under Section 482 of the Code and quash the FIR qua the present
applicants (Nos. 2 to 5).
7. In fine, this application succeeds and is allowed, accordingly.
FIR being C.R. No. 11191008201178 dated 25.10.2020, registered
with Chandkheda Police Station, District: Ahmedabad City for the
offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 294(b) and 114 of
Page 15 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6877/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/07/2026
undefined
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act, culminated into Criminal Case No. 3443 of 2021
pending before the competent Court at Gandhinagar, along with
all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is quashed
and set aside qua the present applicants only.
7.1 Rule is made absolute, accordingly. Direct service is
permitted.
[ P. M. Raval, J. ]
hiren/10tss28726
Page 16 of 16
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Jul 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 28 22:38:55 IST 2026
