Synopsis

The petitioner (a practicing lawyer) challenged a High Court instruction dated 25.04.2019 that provided for listing of criminal appeals under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (challenging bail orders) as per the general roster, not necessarily before the same bench that had decided earlier bail applications. The petitioner argued that such appeals are essentially bail matters and should follow the principle laid down in Shahzad Hasan Khan (1987) requiring successive bail applications to be heard by the same judge. The High Court dismissed the petition, relying on the Supreme Court’s subsequent clarification in Shekhar Prasad Mahto (2025) that the earlier direction is not absolute and does not override the roster system managed by the Chief Justice. The court held that the Chief Justice is the master of the roster, and such administrative instructions are not amenable to legal challenge.

Court: High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. R. Mengey (Single Judge)

Date of Judgment: 30th April 2026

Citation: R/Special Criminal Application (Direction) No. 4253 of 2024 (unreported)

Core Law: Criminal Procedure – Listing of successive bail matters / appeals; Master of roster power of Chief Justice; Precedential value of Supreme Court clarifications.

1. Heading of the judgment

High court of gujarat at ahmedabad

R/special criminal application (direction) no. 4253 of 2024

Aditya ajaykumar choksi (petitioner) vs. Honourable high court of gujarat (respondent)

Coram: hon’ble mr. justice m. r. mengey

Date: 30th april, 2026

2. Legal framework

Major laws and provisions involved:

• Constitution of india, 1950 – article 226 (writ jurisdiction)

• Criminal procedure code / bnss – bail jurisdiction

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.