Gujarat High Court
Kishan @ Kishlo Kalubhai Charola vs State Of Gujarat on 29 October, 2021
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/19565/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19565 of 2021
=============================================
KISHAN @ KISHLO KALUBHAI CHAROLA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=============================================
Appearance:
MR HARNISH V DARJI(3705) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
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 : 29/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
[1] Mr.R.R.Joshi, learned advocate states that he has
instructions to appear for and on behalf of respondent No.2 -
original complainant. He is permitted to file his Vakaltnama.
[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 applicant 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
R/CR.MA/19565/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/10/2021
"the Code"), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting
aside F.I.R. bearing C.R.No.I-12 of 2019 registered with
Chalala Police Station, Dist. Amreli for the offence punishable
under Sections363,376&366 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections
4&18 of the POCSO Act and to quash all other consequential
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicant.
[5] Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
[6] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the
applicant and victim have decided to live together as a
husband and wife but due to some technicality of the age, the
marriage could not be performed. Due to their relationship, a
child is borne. He further submits that the applicant's family
has also accepted the victim as daughter-in-law and her child
and the the applicant's name is shown as father in the Birth
Certificate issued by the Competent Authority. In support of his
submissions, he has annexed Birth Certificate to the petition.
[7] 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.
[8] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for
the State has opposed the present application mainly on the
ground that the victim is aged about 17 years and offence is
serious in nature, therefore, complaint in question may not be
R/CR.MA/19565/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/10/2021
quashed and the present application may be rejected. In
support of her submissions, she relied upon the judgment in
the case of The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxminarayan
reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688.
[9] Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has placed
on record the settlement Affidavit duly sworn by the original
complainant. The same is taken on record. The respondent
No. 2 has filed affidavit stating inter-alia the fact that the
matter is amicably settled with the applicant. 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 Affidavit. On inquiry made
by the Court, the respondent No.2 has declared before this
Court that the dispute between the applicant(s) and
respondent No.2 is resolved and therefore, now the grievance
stands redressed. It is therefore submitted that the present
application may be allowed.
[10] This Court has taken into consideration the fact that
the victim is residing with the applicant and the parents of the
applicant have also accepted as daughter-in-law and her child.
The Birth Certificate of the Child is also on record which shows
the applicant's name as father of the child. This Court has also
taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances
of the case 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.,
R/CR.MA/19565/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/10/2021
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.
[11] Resultantly, this application is allowed and the
impugned FIR bearing C.R.No.I-12 of 2019 registered with
Chalala Police Station, Dist. Amreli filed against present
applicant is hereby quashed and set aside and all other
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed
and set aside qua the applicant. Accordingly, Rule is made
absolute.
Direct service permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
Manoj
