Pradeepbhai Mohanlal Jain vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 2996 Guj

      R/CR.MA/1430/2019                                        ORDER




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

    R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 1430 of 2019
                         With
     R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5092 of 2019
=====================================================
              PRADEEPBHAI MOHANLAL JAIN
                         Versus
                   STATE OF GUJARAT
=====================================================
Appearance:
MR ASIM J PANDYA, Senior Advocate for MR.JAY S
SHAH(7244) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
..... for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR MAULIK NANAVATI for NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for the
Respondent(s) No. 2
NIYANT R BHIMANI(8000) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MAITHILI D MEHTA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)
for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=====================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                          Date : 22/02/2021

                                ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Asim Pandya on behalf of the learned Advocate Mr. Jay S. Shah for the applicants, learned APP Ms. Maithili D. Mehta on behalf of the respondent­State and learned Advocate Mr. Maulik Nanavati on behalf of the M/s Nanavati and Company appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2­ original complainant.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent­State.

R/CR.MA/1430/2019 ORDER

3. By way of this application, the applicants prays for quashing of FIR Number being I­C.R.No.400 of 2018 registered with the Umra Police Station, District­Surat on 8th December, 2018 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Asim Pandya submits that pending this application the parties have settled their dispute and whereas no fruitful purpose would be served if the impugned complaint is permitted to proceed any further.

5. Learned Advocate Mr. Maulik Nanavati appearing for respondent No.2-original complainant confirms what has been submitted by learned Senior Advocate and he further submits that the complainant­Ms. Rini Himanshu Jain-Rini Khabiya may be permitted to join the meeting. Permission is granted. Upon joining the meeting the said complainant is identified by learned Advocate Mr. Maulik Nanavati and who upon inquiry by this Court confirms the fact of the settlement and further confirms that she would not have any objection if the complaint impugned herein is quashed by this Court.

6. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Asim Pandya as well as learned Advocate Mr. Maulik Nanavati further submits that a settlement arrived at between the

R/CR.MA/1430/2019 ORDER

parties dated 5th November, 2020 has been provided to this Court and the same may be taken on record.

7. Learned APP Ms. Maithili Mehta strongly opposed the present application and she further submits that the offences committed by the applicants are serious in nature and therefore, no indulgence may be shown.

8. Considering the submission of learned Advocates for the parties and considering the fact that the settlement arrived at between the parties, and it is a private dispute, more particularly, since the issue is resolved and that she does not wish to proceed further with the impugned FIR and 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, 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), no fruitful purpose would be served, if the complaint is proceeded any further.

9. In view of the discussions and observations above, FIR being I­C.R.No.400 of 2018 registered with the Umra Police Station, District­Surat on

R/CR.MA/1430/2019 ORDER

8th December, 2018 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom is hereby quashed and set aside qua the present applicants.

10. Parties are directed to abide by the terms and conditions of settlement deed dated 5th November, 2020.

11. Learned Civil Court where the divorce proceedings are pending may take up and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible. With this observation, the present application stands disposed of on the above terms.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Registry to communicate this order to the concerned Court/authority by Fax or Email forthwith.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)

Pallavi