The Gujarat High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice Niral R. Mehta quashed the first FIR registered by the Gujarat Police under the state’s ‘anti-love jihad’ law against Muslim man, his parents and priests following the husband and wife settled the matter among themselves. (SAMIR @ SEM S/O ABDULBHAI QURESHI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT)
The bench further noted that continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the FIR would be nothing but unnecessary harassment to the parties.
Facts of the case
The present application was filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code”), the applicants prayed for quashing and setting aside F.I.R. registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 376(2) (n), 377, 312, 313, 504, 506(2), 323, 419 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 4(A), 4(2)(A), 4(2)(B) and 5 of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021 and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5-a), 3(1)(w)(1)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and to quash all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicants.
Contention of the Parties
Both the learned advocates submitted that during the pendency of present petition, the matter was amicably settled amongst the parties and therefore, any further continuation of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would create hardship to the parties and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.
Learned APP opposed the application and submitted that looking at averments made in the FIR, the complaint may not be quashed.
Learned advocate for the complainant confirmed about the settlement having taken place and also confirmed the affidavit filed by the complainant. The said affidavit inter alia stated the fact that the matter is amicably settled between the parties.
Courts Observation and Judgment
The Court taking note of the contention of the Parties remarked, "Considering the fact that the applicant No.1 and the respondent No.2 are the husband and wife respectively and rest of the applicants are the relatives of the applicant No.1, however, because of the matrimonial disputes, the impugned F.I.R. came to be lodged, but, later on, with the mediation of the respective members of the family, an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties and they are residing together. In that view of the matter, the further continuation of the criminal proceedings would jeopardize their future, and thus, this Court is inclined to accept the settlement."
The bench further observed, "Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts of settlement and law laid down by the Apex Court [Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC)], this Court is of the considered view that further continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR would nothing but unnecessary harassment to the parties and trial thereon would be futile and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Thus, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code."
The bench taking note of the same allowed the application.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
