Gujarat High Court
Manishbhai S/O Ravjibhai Laldas ... vs State Of Gujarat on 13 February, 2023
Bench: Gita Gopi
R/CR.MA/33023/2016 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 33023 of 2016
==========================================================
MANISHBHAI S/O RAVJIBHAI LALDAS PATEL & 2 other(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JIGAR G GADHAVI(5613) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR NITIN T GANDHI(5620) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR PRANAV TRIVEDI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR ROHANKUMAR M AMIN(8851) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 13/02/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. This application has been filed under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as
"Cr.P.C.") for quashing and setting aside
the FIR bearing CR No. I-42/2016 registered
with Virpur Police Station for offences
punishable under Sections 363, 366 of the
IPC and Section 4, 11 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act as well as
all subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom.
R/CR.MA/33023/2016 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
2. Learned advocate for the applicants submits
that the FIR against Jatinkumar @ Bhuro
Sureshbhai Patel has been quashed by order
dated 4.10.2017 passed in Criminal Misc.
Application no.24018 of 2017. He further
states that the parties have settled the
dispute amicably outside the Court and that
there remains no grievance between them.
Therefore, in the larger interest of the
parties, the impugned FIR may be quashed and
set aside.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
respondent-State submitted that any FIR
should be quashed in accordance with the
guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the
parameters laid down therein.
4. The complainant is present before this Court
and is represented by learned advocate Mr.
Amin. He states that now there is no dispute
R/CR.MA/33023/2016 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
against all the applicants who are friends
and cousins of Jatinkumar Sureshbhai Patel.
The complainant has also filed an affidavit
stating that now there is no grievance
between them and continuation of FIR would
rather affect the parties. The Court
verified the contents of the compromise with
the original complainant-respondent no.2 who
is present before the Court. The original
complainant affirmed the affidavit, wherein
terms of settlement have been recorded. The
original complainant categorically stated
that the complainant has no grievance
against the applicants and that the
complainant has no objection to the
quashment of the impugned FIR.
5. Considering the principle laid down by the
Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State
of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10
SCC 303, the present matter would fall under
R/CR.MA/33023/2016 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
the criteria laid down therein. In paragraph-
61 of the said judgment, it has been observed
thus:-
"61. The position that emerges
from the above discussion can be
summarised thus: the power of the
High Court in quashing a criminal
proceeding or FIR or complaint in
exercise of its inherent
jurisdiction is distinct and
different from the power given to
a criminal court for compounding
the offences under Section 320 of
the Code. Inherent power is of
wide plenitude with no statutory
limitation but it has to be
exercised in accord with the
guideline engrafted in such power
viz.: (i) to secure the ends of
justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse
of the process of any court. In
what cases power to quash the
criminal proceeding or complaint
or FIR may be exercised where the
offender and the victim have
settled their dispute would depend
on the facts and circumstances of
each case and no category can be
prescribed. However, before
exercise of such power, the High
Court must have due regard to the
nature and gravity of the crime.
Heinous and serious offences of
mental depravity or offences like
murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot
be fittingly quashed even though
R/CR.MA/33023/2016 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
the victim or victims family and
the offender have settled the
dispute. Such offences are not
private in nature and have a
serious impact on society.
Similarly, any compromise between
the victim and the offender in
relation to the offences under
special statutes like the
Prevention of Corruption Act or
the offences committed by public
servants while working in that
capacity, etc.; cannot provide for
any basis for quashing criminal
proceedings involving such
offences. But the criminal cases
having overwhelmingly and
predominatingly civil flavour
stand on a different footing for
the purposes of quashing,
particularly the offences arising
from commercial, financial,
mercantile, civil, partnership or
such like transactions or the
offences arising out of matrimony
relating to dowry, etc. or the
family disputes where the wrong is
basically private or personal in
nature and the parties have
resolved their entire dispute. In
this category of cases, the High
Court may quash the criminal
proceedings if in its view,
because of the compromise between
the offender and the victim, the
possibility of conviction is
remote and bleak and continuation
of the criminal case would put the
accused to great oppression and
prejudice and extreme injustice
R/CR.MA/33023/2016 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
would be caused to him by not
quashing the criminal case despite
full and complete settlement and
compromise with the victim. In
other words, the High Court must
consider whether it would be
unfair or contrary to the interest
of justice to continue with the
criminal proceeding or
continuation of the criminal
proceeding would tantamount to
abuse of process of law despite
settlement and compromise between
the victim and the wrongdoer and
whether to secure the ends of
justice, it is appropriate that
the criminal case is put to an end
and if the answer to the above
question(s) is in the affirmative,
the High Court shall be well
within its jurisdiction to quash
the criminal proceeding."
6. In view of the discussions made hereinabove
and in view of the settlement arrived at
between the parties, there exists no scope
for any further proceeding in the matter. The
continuance of proceedings would lead to
wastage of precious judicial time as there
would remain no possibility of any conviction
in the case. Hence, the Court is of the
R/CR.MA/33023/2016 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023
opinion that this is a fit case where the
inherent powers of the Court under section
482 of the Cr.P.C. could be exercised for
securing the ends of justice.
7. In the result, the application is allowed.
The FIR bearing CR No. I-42/2016 registered
with Virpur Police Station and all
proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof
are quashed and set aside qua the present
applicants. Direct service is permitted.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Maulik
