- (1.)Heard Mr. Nitinchandra Somnath Raval - applicant, party-in-person. He submits that he is a victim in the matter. He lost the precious life of two sons, a daughter-in-law and a grandson among 98 persons on account illegal constructed building collapsed owing to the earth quake on 26/1/2001, the day when the earth quake hit the State of Gujarat.
(2.)Mr. Raval submitted that the investigation was not fair and therefore he challenged up to Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing Criminal Appeal No.1246 of 2017. An application was preferred pursuant to the order dated 14/7/2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the referred matter. Mr. Raval submitted that in spite of said fact the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) rejected the application by order dated 28/8/2018 and aggrieved by the order he had preferred main petition being Special Criminal Application No.8704 of 2018.
2.1 Mr. Raval submitted that during the course of hearing of the said petition, respondent no.3 produced a closure report pertaining to the investigation on 26.09.2018 and a copy of the same was provided to him by order of this Court dated 17.01.2019.

2.2 Mr. Raval stated that perusal of the report suggests that there are suppression of material facts and according to him it was to mislead the Court and therefore he requires to produce on record certain facts and documents including the orders of this Court. He urges that efforts have been made by the investigating authorities to derail the process and to shield the real culprits of the crime. Mr. Raval states that by partial and bias means, a closure report under Sec. 169 Cr.P.C. dated 26/9/2018 has been produced and therefore he has made the prayer for making the amendment in the present petition to contend against the said report and further to bring certain facts on record.

2.3 Mr. Raval stated that the facts he requires to put on record, as stated in paragraphs-5 and 6 in the application and thus has made prayer to permit him to amend the main petition accordingly.

(3.)Heard learned APP, Mr. Pranav Trivedi for the respondent State. He submitted that since the closure report has been produced, there would not be any cause for the petitioner to further agitate against them. Still, however, he submitted that a fair opportunity has to be accorded to all and therefore necessary orders in the interest of justice may be passed.