Gujarat High Court
Keyur Pravinchandra Shah vs State Of Gujarat on 20 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19513/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 19513 of 2024
==========================================================
KEYUR PRAVINCHANDRA SHAH & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANKIT SHAH(6371) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR NANDISH Y CHUDGAR(2011) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 20/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of filing the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants- accused have prayed to quash and set-aside the First Information Report No.1 of 2005 registered with the CID Crime Police Station, District - Gandhinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as the proceedings of the Special Case (ACB) No.28 of 2017 pending before the Special Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Navrangpura, District - Ahmedabad, so also all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto. Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by DEEPAK GEHLOT(HC02361) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 02:43:08 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19513/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026 undefined
2. The present application was filed on merits, however, during the pendency of the matter, the dispute has been resolved between the parties, since both the applicants have deposited the due amount as per the One Time Settlement proposal offered by the respondent - Bank.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Nandish Chudgar appearing for the respondent no.2 - complainant has submitted the affidavit dated 20.04.2026 filed by the authorized officer of the respondent - Bank, namely, Mr. Nurmohmed Suma s/o Bhadurbhai Suma. The same is ordered to be taken on record.
4. Today, when the matter is called out, the authorized officer of the respondent - Bank, namely, Mr. Nurmohmed Suma s/o Bhadurbhai Suma, is personally present before this Court and has produced his identity proof, which is ordered to be taken on record. In the said affidavit, he has categorically stated that he has received his dues of Rs.75,00,000/- and the dispute has been amicably resolved with the applicants. The complainant has further stated that he has no grievance or ill- will against the applicants.
Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by DEEPAK GEHLOT(HC02361) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 02:43:08 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19513/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026 undefined
5. Considering the issue involved in the present application as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been amicably resolved with the applicant, with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for final disposal.
6. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Tirthraj Pandya waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1 - State and learned advocate Mr. Nandish Chudgar waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 - complainant.
7. The authorized officer of the respondent - Bank, who is personally present before this Court, has categorically stated that the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties and he has no objection if the application is allowed and the impugned FIR as well as the proceedings of the special case are quashed and set-aside.
8. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the authorized officer of the respondent - Bank, namely, Mr. Nurmohmed Suma s/o Bhadurbhai Suma, read thus : Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by DEEPAK GEHLOT(HC02361) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 02:43:08 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19513/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026 undefined "4. I state on behalf of the Respondent Bank on affidavit dated 18.02.2026 was filed in furtherance thereto. I state that the Petitioner No. 1 was also a Director of M/s Gayatri Intermediate Pvt. Ltd. The Directors of Gayatri Intermediate Pvt. Ltd. were (1) Pravinchandra Nathalal Shah (2) Keyur Pravinchandra Shah (3) Manish Pravinchandra Shah. The said company was granted of term loan of Rs. 1 crore. The said company i.e. the borrower had hot made the payment in time. However, the said company i.e. Gayatri Intermediate Pvt. Ltd. enter into a one-time settlement under the compromise settlement scheme known as FSS-2016 and made the payment of the settlement amount to the bank. Accordingly, Respondent No. 2 issued a "nil certificate" in favour of M/s Gayatri Intermediate Pvt.
Ltd. on 13.06.2019. Annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-R/3 is a copy of said certificate dated 13.06.2019.
5. So far as Petitioner No. 1 is concerned. He was also Director in another company known as Shri Siddhi Intermediate Pvt. Ltd. So far as the petitioner No. 1 is concerned. The outstanding dues of Petitioner No. 1 has been paid under the settlement. Petitioner No. 1 has paid Rs. 75,00,000/- on 21.01.2024 and accordingly, the Respondent No. 2 bank has issued a "Nil Outstanding Certificate" on 12.02.2024. A copy of such certificate dated 12.02.2024 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-R/4."
9. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that to continue further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR as well as the special case would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process of law.
10. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application and taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by DEEPAK GEHLOT(HC02361) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 02:43:08 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19513/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026 undefined reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 31, Manoj Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 190, and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as well as State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it appears that continuing further with the criminal proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR as well as the special case would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR as well as the proceedings of the special case, so also all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are required to be quashed and set- aside in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
11. In the result, the application is allowed. The proceedings of the First Information Report No. 1 of 2005 registered with the CID Crime Police Station, District - Gandhinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as the proceedings of the Special Case (ACB) No.28 of 2017 pending Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by DEEPAK GEHLOT(HC02361) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 02:43:08 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/19513/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/04/2026 undefined before the Special Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Navrangpura, District - Ahmedabad, so also all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto, are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside qua the present applicants.
12. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J) DEEPAK GEHLOT Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by DEEPAK GEHLOT(HC02361) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 02:43:08 IST 2026