Gopalbhai Surabhai Katodiya ... vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 16697 Guj

      R/CR.MA/12384/2021                                       ORDER DATED: 25/10/2021




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 12384 of 2021

==========================================================
                 GOPALBHAI SURABHAI KATODIYA (MAKWANA)
                                  Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PAWAN A BAROT(6455) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR Y J PATEL(3985) 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 : 25/10/2021
                                    ORAL ORDER

[1] Learned advocate for the applicants does not press the present application qua applicant No.4-Ashwinbhai Mayabhai Katodiya.

The present application stands disposed of as not pressed qua applicant No.4-Ashwinbhai Mayabhai Katodiya.

[2] So far as the other applicants are concerned, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

[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 setting aside F.I.R. bearing C.R.No.11211056210310 of 2021 registered with Surendranagar City B Division Police Station,

R/CR.MA/12384/2021 ORDER DATED: 25/10/2021

Surendranagar for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 325, 504 & 34 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] 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 placed reliance upon the judgment in the case of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxminarayn and submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence and injury sustained to the victim, the complaint in question may not be quashed and the present application may be rejected.

[8] Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has placed on record the settlement Affidavit duly sworn by the original complainant as well as victim, which is at Annexure-B to the petition. The respondent No.2 as well as victim have filed affidavits stating inter-alia the fact that the matter is amicably settled with the applicants. The respondent No.2 as well as victim are present in person before the Court and are 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

R/CR.MA/12384/2021 ORDER DATED: 25/10/2021

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 domestic issue as well as facts of settlement 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.11211056210310 of 2021 registered with Surendranagar City B Division Police Station, Surendranagar 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. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute. Direct service permitted.

(ILESH J. VORA,J) Manoj