Gujarat High Court
Haji Valimamad Kakal vs State Of Gujarat on 18 January, 2021
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/37/2021 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 37 of 2021
================================================================
HAJI VALIMAMAD KAKAL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS.M.K. THAKKAR, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 18/01/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Shri Ashish Dagli for the applicants
and learned APP Ms.M.K. Thakkar for the respondent - State.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP Ms. Moxa Thakkar
waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent
- State.
3. By way of this application, the applicants pray for quashing of
the criminal complaint being C.R. No.11205043203252 of 2020
registered with "B" Division Police Station, District:- Bhuj at Kutch
West for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 114
of the Indian Penal Code.
4. At the outset, it is submitted by learned Advocate Shri Ashish
Dagli that the parties have settled their dispute between themselves
whereas he requests that learned Advocate Shri Mahesh Pujara may
R/CR.MA/37/2021 ORDER
be permitted to join the meeting. Permission is granted. Learned
Advocate Shri Mahesh Pujara is permitted to file his vakalatnama
on behalf of the original complainant. Learned Advocate Shri
Pujara further submits that the complainant is present in his office
and the complainant may be permitted to be joined the meeting.
Permission is granted. Learned Advocate Shri Pujara identifies the
complainant as Mr. Adarsh Anilkumar Jain and who confirms that
the matter is settled and he does not have any objection, if the
impugned complaint is quashed. Learned Advocate Shri Mahesh
Pujara further submits that an affidavit has also been filed by the
complainant whereas the same is annexed at Annexure - C at page
no.24 of the present application.
5. Learned APP Ms. Moxa Thakkar strongly opposed the
quashing of the complaint and she further submits that considering
the allegations leveled against the applicants, no indulgence may be
shown.
6. Having heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and
more particularly, considering the affidavit filed by the original
complainant 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, 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 ) and considering essentially, the
dispute is of private nature as well as the complaint in so far against
the co-accused had been quashed by this Court, this Court is of the
opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served, if the complaint is
R/CR.MA/37/2021 ORDER
proceeded any further.
7. In view of the discussions and observations above, this
application is allowed and the criminal complaint being C.R. I -
11205043203252 of 2020 registered with "B" Division Police
Station, District:- Bhuj at Kutch West filed against the applicants is
hereby quashed and set aside.
8. Rule is made absolute. Registry is directed to communicate
this order to the concerned Police Station through Email.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
VARSHA DESAI
