Gujarat High Court
Faruk Yakubbhai Dalvani vs State Of Gujarat on 8 February, 2021
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/19859/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19859 of 2020
============================================
FARUK YAKUBBHAI DALVANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
============================================
Appearance:
MR RUTURAJ NANAVATI(5624) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MOXA THAKKAR ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 08/02/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Shri Ruturaj Nanavati for the applicants,
learned APP Ms. Moxa Thakkar for the respondent No.1 - State and learned
Advocate Ms. Ketki Jha for the respondent No.2 - original complainant.
2. Learned Advocate Ms. Ketki Jha submits that she has filed her
Vakalatnama for appearing on behalf of the original complainant and
affidavit of the complainant stating the fact about settlement between the
applicants. The Registry is directed to place the same on record of this
matter.
3. Rule. Learned APP Ms. Moxa Thakkar waives service of Rule on
behalf of the respondent No.1 - State and Ms. Ketki Jha waives service of
Rule on behalf of the respondent No.2.
4. By way of present application, the applicants pray for quashing of the
R/CR.MA/19859/2020 ORDER
complaint being FIR No. 11191011200156 of 2020 registered with DCB
Police Station, Ahmedabad City, dated 28.10.2020 for the offences under
Sections 120-B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 294(B), 506(2) and 507 of
the Indian Penal Code.
5. Learned Advocate Shri Nanavati for the applicants submits that the
dispute, which had resulted in the complaint, is now settled between the
parties during the pendency of the present application. He submits that no
fruitful purpose would be served in permitting the complaint to continue
any further. He therefore, prays to quash the complaint qua the applicants
6. Learned Advocate Ms. Ketki Jha, who is permitted to join the
meeting and submits that the the original complainant may be permitted to
join the meeting. Permission is granted. The original complainant - Shaival
Sunilbhai Parikh is identified by the learned Advocate Ms. Ketki Jha and
upon inquiry by this Court, the complainant confirms the fact of settlement.
The complainant also states that he would not have any objection, if the
complaint is quashed.
7. Learned APP Ms. Moxa Thakkar strongly opposed the application
and she further submits that the offences committed by the applicants are
serious in nature and therefore, no indulgence may be shown towards the
applicants.
8. Having heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and more
particularly, considering the fact that the dispute was private in nature and
the dispute is settled between the parties and also considering the judgments
of the Supreme Court in the cases of 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 , Manoj Sharma Vs.
State & Ors. , reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh
R/CR.MA/19859/2020 ORDER
& Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67
(SC), this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served,
if the complaint is proceeded any further.
9. In view of the discussions and observations above, the criminal
complaint being FIR No. 11191011200156 of 2020 registered with DCB
Police Station, Ahmedabad City, dated 28.10.2020 for the offences under
Sections 120-B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 294(B), 506(2) and 507 of
the Indian Penal Code is hereby quashed and set aside qua the present
applicant.
Rule is made absolute. Registry is directed to communicate this order
to the concerned Police Station through Email immediately.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Y.N. VYAS
