Gujarat High Court
Dilip Kanabhai Bamrotiya vs State Of Gujarat on 28 January, 2021
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/319/2021 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 319 of 2021
============================================
DILIP KANABHAI BAMROTIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
============================================
Appearance:
MR Y J PATEL(3985) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PAWAN A BAROT(6455) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 28/01/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Shri Y.J. Patel for the applicant, learned APP
Ms. Shruti Pathak for the respondent No.1 - State and learned Advocate
Shri Pawan A. Barot for the respondent No.2.
2. Rule. Learned APP Ms. Shruti Pathak waives service of Rule for the
respondent No.1 - State and learned Advocate Shri Pawan A. Barot waives
service of Rule for the respondent No.2
3. By way of present application, the applicant prays for quashing of the
complaint being C.R. No. 11186004200637 of 2020 registered with
Prabhash Patan Police Station, Dist. Gir Somnath dated 18.09.2020 for the
offences under Sections 376(2)(N) and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Learned Advocate Shri Y.J. Patel submits that the complaint had
been filed on account of misunderstanding and pursuant to the filing of the
R/CR.MA/319/2021 ORDER
complaint, due to intervention of the family members and friend, the
dispute has been resolved and therefore, no fruitful purpose would be
served, if the complaint is permitted to continue against the applicant
herein.
5. Learned Advocate Shri Pawan Barot for the complainant submits that
the complainant has already filed an affidavit to this regard. He submits that
the complainant - Laxmiben Vinubhai Solanki is present in office of learned
Advocate Shri Hamir Vala and the complainant may be permitted to join
the meeting. Permission is granted.
Learned Advocate Shri Vala has identified the complainant. The
complainant has joined the meeting and upon inquiry by this Court, she
confirms the fact of settlement and she further confirms that she would not
have any objection, if the complaint is quashed.
6. Learned APP Ms. Shruti Pathak strongly opposed the present
application and she further submits that the offences committed by the
applicant are serious in nature and therefore, no indulgence may be shown.
7. Having heard learned Advocates for the respective parties, this Court
is of the opinion that while allegations levelled in the complaint against
applicant are serious, but looking to the averments made in the affidavit
filed by the complainant dated 22.12.2020, 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
R/CR.MA/319/2021 ORDER
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 criminal
complaint being being C.R. No. 11186004200637 of 2020 registered with
Prabhash Patan Police Station, Dist. Gir Somnath dated 18.09.2020 for the
offences under Sections 376(2)(N) and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code 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.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Y.N. VYAS
