Gujarat High Court
Devaji Umedji Sundesha (Mali) vs State Of Gujarat on 17 June, 2021
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/21956/2017 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 21956 of 2017
============================================
DEVAJI UMEDJI SUNDESHA (MALI)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
============================================
Appearance:
MR DK DESAI(278) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.MRUDUL M BAROT(3750) 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 : 17/06/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Shri D.K. Desai for the applicant, learned
APP Ms. M.D. Mehta for the respondent No.1 - State and learned
Advocate Shri Mrudul M. Barot for the respondent No.2.
2. By way of present application, the applicant prays for quashing of the
complaint being I C.R. No. 37 of 2017 registered with Deesa Rural Police
Station, Dist. Banaskantha, dated 25.03.2017 for the offences under Sections
447, 384, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned Advocates Shri Desai and Shri Barot jointly submit that
during the pendency of the present application, the parties have amicably
settled the dispute and whereas the complainant has filed affidavit, wherein
he confirms the fact about the settlement and he further submits that he
would not have any objection, if the impugned complaint is quashed by this
R/CR.MA/21956/2017 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021
Court qua the applicant.
4. Learned Advocate Shri Barot for the respondent No.2 - original
complainant submits that the complainant may be permitted to join the
meeting. Permission is granted. Upon joining the meeting, the complainant
- Hemarajbhai Laljibhai Prajapati is identified by the learned Advocate Shri
Barot and upon inquiry by this Court, the complainant confirms that fact of
the settlement and further confirms that he would not have any objection, if
the complaint is quashed.
5. Learned APP Ms. M.D. Mehta strongly opposed the quashing of the
complaint and she further submits that since allegations levelled against the
applicants are serious in nature and therefore, no indulgence may be shown
by this Court.
6. Having heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and more
particularly, considering the affidavit filed by the original complainant on
25.09.2020 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 I C.R. No. 37 of 2017 registered with Deesa Rural Police
Station, Dist. Banaskantha, dated 25.03.2017 for the offences under Sections
447, 384, 504, 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.
R/CR.MA/21956/2017 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2021
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
