Gujarat High Court
Namrataben Hiteshbhai Sukhia vs State Of Gujarat on 31 March, 2022
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/34391/2016 ORDER DATED: 31/03/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 34391 of 2016
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 8271 of 2017
==========================================================
NAMRATABEN HITESHBHAI SUKHIA & 2 other(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. KRUTI M SHAH(2428) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR JK SHAH, ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 31/03/2022
ORAL ORDER
Order in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 34391 of 2016
1. Heard learned Advocate Ms. Kruti M. Shah on behalf of the applicants
and learned APP Mr. J. K. Shah on behalf of the respondent-State.
2. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah would submit that while learned Advocate
Mr. Mukesh Vaidya is appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 2, since
learned Advocate Mr. Vaidya at present not in the country and since the
settlement has been arrived at between the parties, the complainant is
present in the Court and whereas learned Advocate Ms. Shah would
identify the complainant and learned Advocate Ms. Shah would further
request that the complainant may be permitted to address the Court
insofar as the settlement aspect is concerned. Permission is granted.
R/CR.MA/34391/2016 ORDER DATED: 31/03/2022
3. By way of Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 34391 of 2016, the
applicants pray for quashing of the FIR being C. R. No. I-146 of 2016
registered with the Adajan Police Station, Dist. Surat on 19.11.2016 for
offences punishable under Sections- 498(A), 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of
the Indian Penal Code and under Sections -3 and 7 of the Prevention of
Dowry Prohibition Act.
4. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah on behalf of the applicants would submit
that pending the application, the parties have settled the matter inter se
and whereas the complainant would not have any objection if the
impugned FIR is quashed by this Court. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah
further tenders affidavit of the original complainant, the same is taken on
record, wherein it is noticed that vide judgment dated 09.10.2020 learned
Family Court No. 3, Surat had been pleased to allow an application by the
complainant and her husband under Section-13B of the Hindu Marriage
Act for divorce by mutual consent. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah would
submit that such a divorce was part of the settlement agreement between
the parties. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah would submit that having regard
to the same, the application may be allowed by the Court and the
impugned FIR may be quashed. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah would
further submit that the complainant, who is present in this Court may be
permitted to address this Court, more particularly, stating her consent for
R/CR.MA/34391/2016 ORDER DATED: 31/03/2022
quashing of the impugned FIR. The complainant who is identified by
learned Advocate Ms. Shah, would submit that the matter is settled
between the parties and whereas she would not have any objection if the
FIR impugned is quashed by this Court.
5. Learned APP Mr. J. K. Shah would submit while allegations leveled in
the FIR are serious in nature, looking to the subsequent developments this
Court may pass appropriate orders.
6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned Advocates for the
respective parties and having considered the dispute is personal and
matrimonial in nature as mentioned in the FIR, in the considered opinion
of this Court, no fruitful purpose would be served if the impugned FIR as
well as any proceedings arising therefrom are permitted to continue any
further. This Court relies upon the observations of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in 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) to arrive at such a
conclusion.
R/CR.MA/34391/2016 ORDER DATED: 31/03/2022
7. Having regard to the same, the impugned FIR being C. R. No. I-146 of
2016 registered with the Adajan Police Station, Dist. Surat on 19.11.2016
for offences punishable under Sections- 498(A), 323, 504, 506(2) and 114
of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections - 3 and 7 of the Prevention
of Dowry Prohibition Act and all further proceedings arising therefrom
stand quashed qua the applicants herein. Rule is made absolute to the
aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
8. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah would also submit that the husband of the
complainant has also independently filed a petition praying for quashing
of the FIR being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 34476 of 2016
and whereas in view of the order passed in the present application, this
Court may call for the papers of the said matter and quash the impugned
FIR qua the husband of the applicant also. Having regard to the fact that
the matter is not listed before this Court today, let the said matter be listed
on the 04.04.2022 and whereas personal presence of the complainant for
the said matter is dispensed with.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Mrs. J. J. Kedia
