Gujarat High Court
Irfan @ Daddy Ikbalbhai Shaikh vs State Of Gujarat on 24 February, 2021
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/20196/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 20196 of 2020
============================================
IRFAN @ DADDY IKBALBHAI SHAIKH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
============================================
Appearance:
BHARATKUMAR A DESAI(8513) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RINK U C DESAI(10277) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MD MEHTA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 24/02/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Bharatkumar A. Desai for the applicant,
learned APP Ms. M.D. Mehta for the respondent No.1 - State and learned
Advocate Shri Rinku C. Desai for the respondent No.2.
2. By way of present application, the applicant prays for quashing of the
complaint being FIR No.11191018201702 registered with Gomtipur Police
Station, Ahmedabad, dated 05.12.2020 for the offences under Sections 323,
294(b), 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned Advocate Shri Desai for the applicant submits that during
the pendency of the present application, the parties have settled the dispute
inter se. He further submits that no fruitful purpose would be served, if the
complaint is allowed to proceed any further. He therefore, prays to quash
the complaint qua the applicant.
R/CR.MA/20196/2020 ORDER
4. Learned Advocate Shri Rinku Desai confirms what is stated by the
learned Advocate for the applicant. Learned Advocate submits that the
complainant - Usmankhan Rasulkhan Pathan may be allowed to join the
meeting. Permission is granted. Upon inquiry by this Court, the complainant
confirms the fact of settlement and he would not have any objection, if the
complaint is quashed. Learned Advocate Shri Rinku Desai has identified the
complainant and he submits that an affidavit stating as much has also been
filed which is at page 13 of the present application. He further submits that
in view of the same, this Court may quash the complaint against the
applicant.
5. Learned APP Ms. M.D. Mehta strongly opposed the application and
she further submits that the offences committed by the applicant is grave
and serious and therefore, no indulgence may be shown.
6. Having heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and more
particularly, considering the fact that the dispute is private in nature and the
complainant does not have any objection, if the complaint is quashed and
further considering the affidavit filed by the original complainant on
10.12.2020 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 & 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.
7. In view of the discussions and observations above, the criminal
complaint being being FIR No.11191032200678 registered with Maninagar
Police Station, Ahmedabad, dated 26.09.2020 for the offences under
R/CR.MA/20196/2020 ORDER
Sections 406, 420, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom are 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
