12-07-11. Gujarat High Court at Sola in Ahmedabad. Photo by Kevin Antao.
Suspicious about the neighbour’s existence, HC on Sept 30 ordered police to produce Mungar in court. Because no such person existed, the police then informed the court that the supposed neighbour was nowhere to be found —.
It directed the Gir Somnath SP to conduct a departmental inquiry against Parmar “in a manner that conveys a clear message to all police officers that any attempt to fabricate or create evidence while discharging their official duties shall be viewed seriously”. Ahmedabad: A police head constable apparently found a novel way to serve court warrants — by staying put at the police station and letting an imaginary neighbour do the talking. Gujarat High Court has now ordered both a departmental inquiry and criminal prosecution against P A Parmar of Veraval police station for allegedly fabricating a report about an accused’s whereabouts. During the hearing, Justice M K Thakker’s queries led to an unusual discovery. Head constable Parmar had prepared a statement attributed to one Ajay Mungar, purportedly Shrivastav’s neighbour, claiming that the accused had changed his address. HC expressed concern that Parmar might have prepared similar reports in other cases too. The SP has suspended Parmar and begun an inquiry.
The matter concerns cheating accused Sandeep Shrivastav, a resident of Nikol Road in Ahmedabad, whose case was transferred from a Rajkot court to Veraval in Gir Somnath district in Feb 2024. The Veraval court’s notice informing him about the transfer in May 2024 went unserved. Notices to his lawyer and surety also returned unserved, as did a bailable warrant issued in Dec 2024. A non-bailable warrant followed in 2025, but Shrivastav remained elusive — at least in the paperwork. Gujarat High Court Lays Down Guidelines To Declare Accused As An Absconder In July 2025, the court declared him an absconder under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and ordered trial to proceed in his absence under Section 299.
Shrivastav had attended hearings in Rajkot but, according to his counsel H S Toliya, he stopped receiving court notices after the transfer, despite continuing to live at the same address.
