NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1997/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 1997 of 2014
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5087 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
TITUS GEORGE
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KIRTIDEV R DAVE(3267) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MS ASMITA PATEL, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 09/08/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Virat Popat for the petitioner, Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:47:51 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1997/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/08/2023 undefined learned advocate Mr. KR Dave for the respondent No.3 and learned APP appearing for the respondent State.
2. Both the petitions arose from one and same incident challenging the FIR being I - C.R. No. 14 of 2014 registered with "B" Division Gandhidham Police Station, Dist: Kachchh for the offences punishable u/s 498A, 323 and 114 of the IPC.
3. What is alleged against the petitioner Ebenezer George that he has beaten his wife i.e. the complainant and also met the complainant with cruelty both physically and mentally and as such, the aforesaid complaint came to be registered at the end of the complainant wife.
4. Learned advocate appearing for the contesting party in their utter fairness submits that compromise has arrived at between the parties and they have taken decision from parting away from each other's life putting their grievances to the rest. They have also produced the order passed below Exh.1 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, Kachchh in Special Marriage Petition No.1 of 2014, in which, the learned Joint District Judge recorded that the parties have entered into compromise and they have produced the compromise pursis as well, which is already signed by learned advocates for both the sides. The learned Joint District Judge ordered to draw the divorce decree in terms of compromise.
5. What emanates by subsequent development that the parties have mutually agreed to part away from each other's life leaving behind the quarrels to the rest. The allegations levelled Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:47:51 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1997/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/08/2023 undefined against the present petitioner are no more than the said quarrels, which is ordinarily appearing in the marriage life. The circumstances spell that this is a fit case where parameters in case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, interpreting section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, principally, inherent power of this Court, is attracted. The Hon'ble Apex Court made following observations:-
"In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Ch.XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which we have extracted and reproduced above, the following categories of cases are given by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formula and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
(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 in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investi- gation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code;
(3) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:47:51 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1997/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/08/2023 undefined FIR or 'complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused;
(4) where the allegations in the FIR 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 Section 155(2) of the Code; (5) where the allegations made in the FIR 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 institu- tion and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, (7) where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide 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. Thus, allowing the proceedings further and sending the petitioner to face the trial is abortive and futile exercise. It will not serve any purpose except harassment to the parties.
7. In the result, present petitions are allowed and FIR being I
- C.R. No. 14 of 2014 registered with "B" Division Gandhidham Police Station, Dist: Kachchh and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) SHEKHAR P. BARVE Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 00:47:51 IST 2023