Gujarat High Court
Farukmohammed Dinmohammed ... vs State Of Gujarat on 22 February, 2021
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/3221/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 3221 of 2019
=====================================================
FARUKMOHAMMED DINMOHAMMED MAKRANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=====================================================
Appearance:
MR MAHENDRA U VORA(3034) for the Applicant(s) No.
1,2,3,4,5
MS NEHA C SHUKLA(6172) 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 Advocate Mr. Mahendra U Vora on
behalf of the applicants, learned APP Ms. M.D.
Mehta on behalf of the respondentState and
learned Advocate Ms. Neha Shukla on behalf of
the respondent No.2original complainant.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of
rule on behalf of the respondentState.
3. By way of this application, the applicants prays
for quashing of impugned FIR being IC.R.No.66
of 2018 registered with Idar Police Station,
DistrictSabarkantha on 2nd June, 2018 for the
offences punishable under Sections 323, 498(A),
504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Mahendra Vora on behalf of
the applicants submits the pending this
application, the applicants and the complainant
R/CR.MA/3221/2019 ORDER
have settled the dispute, more particularly,
since the dispute was matrimonial in nature. He
further submits that under such circumstances no
fruitful purpose would be served if the
complaint impugned is permitted to proceed any
further.
5. Learned Advocate Ms. Neha Shukla appearing on
behalf of the original complainantrespondent
No.2 confirms what has been submitted by learned
Advocate Mr. Mahendra Vora and further submits
that original complainant - Mrs. Arefabanu
Farukmohammed Sindhva may be permitted to join
the meeting. Permission is granted. Upon joining
original complainant is identified by learned
advocate Ms. Neha Shukla and upon inquiry by
this Court the complainant confirms the
settlement arrived at between the parties and
she would not have any objection if the
complaint impugned is quashed by this Court.
6. Learned APP Ms. M.D. Mehta appearing on behalf
of the respondentState strongly opposed this
application by submitting that the allegation
levelled against the applicants are grave and
serious and therefore no indulgence deserves to
be shown by this Court.
7. Considering the fact that it was a private
dispute/matrimonial dispute, more particularly,
since the issue is resolved and that she does
not wish to proceed further with the impugned
R/CR.MA/3221/2019 ORDER
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.
8. In view of the discussions and observations
above, the FIR being IC.R.No.66 of 2018
registered with Idar Police Station, District
Sabarkantha on 2nd June, 2018 for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 498(A), 504,
506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom
including C.C. No.1072/2018 pending before the
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Idar are hereby
quashed and setaside qua the present
applicants.
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
