Dansinh Dadubhai Gohil vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 1447 Guj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1447 Guj
Judgement Date : 13 February, 2023

Gujarat High Court

Dansinh Dadubhai Gohil vs State Of Gujarat on 13 February, 2023

Bench: Gita Gopi

     R/CR.MA/24079/2018                                      ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

        R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 24079 of 2018
                             With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FIXING DATE OF EARLY HEARING) NO.
                          1 of 2023
                              In
        R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 24079 of 2018
==========================================================
                            DANSINH DADUBHAI GOHIL
                                     Versus
                               STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR CHINTAN S POPAT(5004) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ANURAG RATHOR for the victim
MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 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-253/2006 registered

with Una Police Station, District Gir

Somnath (old District Junagadh) for offences

punishable under Sections 363, 366, 506(2)

of the IPC as well as all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom.

R/CR.MA/24079/2018 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023

2. Learned advocate for the applicant submits

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.

Rathor. Let the Vakalatnama be accepted. The

victim girl, who is wife of the applicant,

has filed an affidavit stating that she has

married the applicant and out of the

relation, there were 3 children, aged about

R/CR.MA/24079/2018 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023

10, 8 and 6 years. She submits that the

father was against the relationship and that

had resulted into FIR. She further states

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 victim girl who

is present before the Court. The victim girl

affirmed the affidavit, wherein terms of

settlement have been recorded. The victim

girl categorically stated that she has no

grievance against the applicant and that she

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

the criteria laid down therein. In paragraph-

61 of the said judgment, it has been observed

R/CR.MA/24079/2018 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023

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 the victim or victims family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have a

R/CR.MA/24079/2018 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023

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 would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In

R/CR.MA/24079/2018 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023

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

opinion that this is a fit case where the

inherent powers of the Court under section

R/CR.MA/24079/2018 ORDER DATED: 13/02/2023

482 of the Cr.P.C. could be exercised for