Naginbhai Kikabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat
2022 Latest Caselaw 3936 Guj

     R/CR.MA/20097/2020                                      JUDGMENT DATED: 04/04/2022



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                 R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 20097 of 2020

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
========================================================

1      Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the No
       judgment ?

2      To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                           No

3      Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment No
       ?

4      Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the No
       interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made
       thereunder ?

========================================================
                           NAGINBHAI KIKABHAI PATEL
                                     Versus
                               STATE OF GUJARAT
========================================================
Appearance:
PRASHANTKUMAR R SHARMA(8591) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MAITHILI D MEHTA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
========================================================
     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

                                    Date : 04/04/2022

                                   ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Prashantkumar R. Sharma on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Maithili D. Mehta on behalf of respondent no.1- State.

2. Though served, none appears on behalf of respondent no.2- original complainant.

3. By way of this petition, the petitioner prays for quashing of impugned

R/CR.MA/20097/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/04/2022

FIR being C.R. No. I-171 of 2008 registered with the Vapi Town Police Station, District; Valsad for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 471, 161, 191, 204, 192, 193 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and further proceedings arising therefrom qua the present petitioner.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Sharma would submit that the present petitioner being original accused no. 20, was a Revenue Officer working at the relevant point of time with the office of Mamlatdar, Pardi. Learned Advocate would submit that the accused no.1 and 2 who have allegedly transferred the land of the first informant in their own names whereas accused no. 3 to 17 were the co-owners of the land in question and accused no. 18 to 22 are Revenue Officers.

5. Learned Advocate would submit that the allegation against petitioner being that he had certified entry with regard to a registered sale-deed which was fraudulent in nature. Learned Advocate would submit that as such insofar as other revenue officers learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide an order dated 21.10.2020 in Criminal Misc. Application 12758 of 2020 considering the fact that there were no allegations against the Revenue Officers of being involved in the principal conspiracy and further considering the fact that the dispute between the private parties, has been settled, has been pleased to quash the FIR, therefore learned Advocate would submit that the impugned FIR may be quashed insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

6. Learned APP Ms. Mehta could not dispute the fact that FIR with regard to other co-accused, who had role similar to that of the present petitioner, having been quashed by this Court.

7. Having regard to the submissions made by learned Advocates for the

R/CR.MA/20097/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/04/2022

parties, more particularly considering order passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No. 12758 of 2020, the present petition deserves consideration.

7.1 At this stage it would be relevant to refer to observations of learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the above said judgement, paragraph no.9 being the relevant paragraph is reproduced hereinbelow for benefit:

"9. Since now, the dispute with reference to the impugned F.I.R. is settled and resolved by and between the main accused Nos.1 and 2 by way of a settlement deed, the trial would be a futile and any further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Special Civil Suit No.80 of 2007 (later numbered as Regular Civil Suit No.116 of 2014) is also withdrawn by the first informant on 19.09.2018 in view of the settlement deed and hence, nothing remains in the matter and no party is put to loss. In view of the settlement, this Court vide order dated 27.06.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.11796 of 2019 has quashed the impugned FIR qua the main accused Nos.1 and 2. Hence, the present applicant cannot be made to further undergo the rigorous of prosecution in light of the quashing of the FIR qua the main accused Nos.1 and 2. Therefore, the impugned F.I.R. is required to be quashed and set aside. The complainant has chosen not to appear before this Court even after service of notice of rule.

8. Having regard to the fact that the present petitioner, is alleged to have certified an entry with regard to a registered sale-deed and more particularly considering the fact that there are no allegations against the present petition of being involved in the main conspiracy and furthermore considering the fact that the main parties to the dispute have settled the matter inter se and also considering order of this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No. 12758 of 2020, in the considered opinion of this Court, the present petition deserves consideration.

9. The impugned FIR being C.R. No. I-171 of 2008 registered with the Vapi Town Police Station, District; Valsad for offences punishable under

R/CR.MA/20097/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/04/2022

Sections 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 471, 161, 191, 204, 192, 193 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and any proceedings arising therefrom stands quashed and set aside qua the petitioner. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) NIRU