Usmanbhai Ibrahimbhai ... vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 3289 Guj

        R/CR.MA/4638/2020                                  ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

           R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 4638 of 2020

==========================================================
              USMANBHAI IBRAHIMBHAI VOHRA(GHANCHI)
                              Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MOHAMADZAID I SAIYED(8411) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR M.NISAR VAIDHYA(3386) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MOKSHA THAKKAR, ADDL. 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 Mr. M. I. Saiyed for the applicants, learned APP Ms. Moksha Thakkar for respondent - State and learned advocate Mr. Arbazkhan Pathan for respondent No.2 - original complainant.

Issue Rule returnable forthwith.

2. On 12.02.2021, this Court has passed following order;

"1. At the outset, learned Advocate Mr. Mohamadzaid I. Saiyed for the applicants submits that learned Advocate Mr. Arbazkhan A. Pathan has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent No.2- original complainant and he may be permitted to join the meeting. Permission is granted. Learned Advocate Mr. Arbazkhan A. Pathan is permitted to file his Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent No.2- original complainant.

2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Saiyed for the applicants, learned APP Ms. M.D. Mehta for the respondent-State and

R/CR.MA/4638/2020 ORDER

learned Advocate Mr. Pathan for the respondent No.2- original complainant.

3. Learned Advocate Mr. Saiyed for the applicants submits that after filing of the criminal complaint, the parties have amicably settled the matter and therefore the impugned complaint and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom may be quashed by this Court.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Pathan for the respondent No.2- original complainant submits that the complainant- Shahenaazbanu W/o Habibullah Fatemohammed Saiyed is present in his office and that she may be permitted to join the meeting. Permission is granted. Learned advocate Mr. Pathan identified the said complainant and upon inquiry by this Court, the complainant confirms that she has settled the matter with the applicants herein. The complainant also states that she does not have any objection if the impugned complaint and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

5. Learned APP Ms. Mehta submits that the allegations levelled against the applicants in the complaint are very serious and therefore the fact of settlement may require verification. Considering the same, stand over to 25.02.2021. Learned APP Ms. Mehta to take appropriate instructions in this regard."

3. By order dated 2.2.2021, this Court has recorded the submissions of the learned advocate for the petitioner and learned advocate for the original complainant. They both have jointly submitted that matter is settled between the parties and in view of such settlement, this Court may quash the complaint.

4. On last occasion, learned APP has submitted that allegations levelled against the applicants are very serious and therefore, requested for time to verify the settlement. Today, learned APP submits that the Investigating Officer has verified the facts of settlement.

5. Having heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and more particularly, considering the affidavit filed by the original complainant on 15.02.2020 and the affidavit filed by the victim on 12.02.2020 and also considering the judgments of the Supreme

R/CR.MA/4638/2020 ORDER

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.

6. In view of the discussions and observations above, the criminal complaint being being I C.R. No. 107 of 2012 registered with Naranpura Police Station, Ahmedabad, dated 07.03.2012 for the offences under Sections 143, 149, 365 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby quashed and set aside qua the present applicant.

7. Rule is made absolute. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Police Station through Email immediately.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) DRASHTI K. SHUKLA