Hanifbhai Valibhai Rathod vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 16083 Guj

      R/CR.MA/17773/2021                           ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

        R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 17773 of 2021
=============================================
                           HANIFBHAI VALIBHAI RATHOD
                                     Versus
                               STATE OF GUJARAT
=============================================
Appearance:
DENISH V MAVADHIYA(9207) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS.SHRUTI PATHAK APP(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

                               Date : 12/10/2021

                                 ORAL ORDER

[1] Mr.Urvesh Prajapati, learned advocate states that he has instructions to appear for and on behalf of respondent No.2. He is permitted to file his appearance.

[2] Considering the issues involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicants and respondent No.2 has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

[3] Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

[4] By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the applicants have prayed for quashing and

R/CR.MA/17773/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021

setting aside F.I.R. bearing C.R.No.11186004210598 of 2021 registered with Prbhas Patan Police Station, Gir-Somnath for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506(2) & 114 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 135 of the G.P.Act and to quash all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicants.

[5] Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

[6] Learned advocate for the applicants submits that there is no past antecedent of like nature against the present applicants. Both the learned advocates would submit that during the pendency of present application, the matter is amicably settled amongst the parties and therefore, any further continuation of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would create hardship to the parties and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.

[7] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the present application and submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence, the complaint in question may not be quashed and the present application may be rejected. Learned APP has placed reliance upon the judgment in the case of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxminarayan.

[8] Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has placed on record the settlement Affidavit duly sworn by him, which is at Annexure-B to the petition. The respondent No.2 has filed affidavit stating inter-alia the fact that the matter is amicably settled with the applicants. The respondent No.2 is present in

R/CR.MA/17773/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021

person before the Court and is identified by learned advocate for respondent No.2 and also admits the contents of the Affidavits. On inquiry made by the Court, the original complainant has declared before this Court that the dispute between the applicant(s) and original complainant is resolved and therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. It is therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed.

[9] Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and considering the facts of settlement as well as the dispute between the family members and law laid down by the Apex Court [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),] this Court is of the considered view that further continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR would nothing but unnecessary harassment to the parties and trial thereon would be futile and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Thus, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.

[10] Resultantly, this application is allowed and the impugned FIR bearing C.R.No.11186004210598 of 2021 registered with Prbhas Patan Police Station, Gir-Somnath

R/CR.MA/17773/2021 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2021

filed against present applicants is hereby quashed and set aside and all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside qua the applicants.

[11] As the impugned FIR bearing C.R.No.11186004210598 of 2021 registered with Prbhas Patan Police Station, Gir-Somnath stands quashed and set aside by this Court, the applicants No. 1 & 2 are ordered to be released from jail forthwith, if they are not required in any other case. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute.

Direct service permitted.

(ILESH J. VORA,J) Manoj