Bharatbhai Nimeshbhai Parmar ... vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 3286 Guj

     R/CR.MA/13011/2018                                            ORDER




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO.                   13011 of 2018

=====================================================
  BHARATBHAI NIMESHBHAI PARMAR (LUHAR) & 5 other(s)
                        Versus
            STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
=====================================================
Appearance:
MS. SHAILI A KAPADIA(3453) for the Applicant(s) No.
1,2,3,4,5,6
MR FOUZAN N SONIWALA(8442) for the Respondent(s) No.
2
MR MANAN V PATEL(8059) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MAITHILI D MEHTA, ADDITONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)
for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=====================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                          Date : 25/02/2021

                              ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Ms. Shaili A. Kapadia on behalf of the applicants and learned APP Ms. Maithili D. Mehta on behalf of the respondent­ State and learned Advocate Mr. Fouzan N. Soniwala appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2 herein­original complainant.

2. By way of this application, the applicants have prayed for quashing of criminal complaint filed by respondent No.2 under Section 12 of the Domestic Violation Act before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat bearing Criminal Misc. Application No.642 of 2014 and further proceedings initiated

R/CR.MA/13011/2018 ORDER

thereupon.

3. Learned Advocate Ms. Kapadia submits that after filing of the petition, parties have settled the dispute interse and whereas a settlement deed has also been arrived at between the parties. Considering the same, she submits that complaint impugned in this petition along with proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Surat may be quashed by this Court.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Soniwala appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2­original complainant confirms what has been submitted by learned Advocate Ms. Kapadia. He further submits that his client has preferred an affidavit in this application wherein the fact of settlement is mentioned and whereas settlement deed also has been annexed with the said affidavit. He submits that copy of the affidavit is already submitted in the registry and whereas soft copy is submitted to this Court which is directed to be taken on record. He further submits that his client is present and she may be permitted to join the meeting. Permission is granted. Upon joining the meeting complainant Artiben Bharatbhai Parmar is identified by learned Advocate Mr. Soniwala and she confirms the fact of settlement between the parties and she further confirms that she would not have any objections if the complaint impugned herein as

R/CR.MA/13011/2018 ORDER

well as proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat are quashed by this Court.

5. Considering the fact that the dispute which has resulted in filing of the impugned complaint was matrimonial in nature and considering the settlement between the parties which is reflected in the settlement deed.

6. Learned APP Ms. Maithili Mehta strongly objects to this application and submits that considering the allegations levelled against the applicants no interference may be made by this court in the impugned complaint as well as criminal case.

7. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties, this Court is of the opinion that looking to the averments made in the affidavit filed by the complainant dated 18th February, 2021 more particularly, since the issue is resolved and that he does not wish to proceed any 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, 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

R/CR.MA/13011/2018 ORDER

further.

8. In view of the discussions and observations above, the criminal complaint/FIR being No.C.R. No.I­159 of 2014 registered with Varacha Police Station, District Surat on 18th June, 2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(a), 323, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and punishable under Sections 3, 5 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom 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.

Direct service is permitted through electronic mode.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)

Pallavi