Gujarat High Court
Rajeshkumar Mohanbhai Prajapati vs State Of Gujarat on 16 February, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/81/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 81 of 2023
==========================================================
RAJESHKUMAR MOHANBHAI PRAJAPATI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
VISHAL K ANANDJIWALA(7798) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR YASH K DAVE(10269) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MOXA THAKKAR APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 16/02/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. By this application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, the applicant
herein - original accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this
Court and has prayed for quashing of the FIR being No.
11204046110627 of 2022 registered with Nadiad Town Police
Station, Dist.: Kheda, for the offence under Sections 420, 465, 468
469, 471 and 114 of the IPC.
2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file present application are
that, the complainant Dhavalsinh Solanki was assured for a good job
in Amul Dairy and in lieu of job, the accused herein had asked to
pay Rs.14,35,000/- and on different dates, the amount was paid,
either in cash or by Google pay and by Phone-pe. After receiving
the amount, the applicant accused could not arrange for the job as
promised by him nor returned back the amount and on repeated
request, he had issued forged letter, giving appointment to the
R/CR.MA/81/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2023
complainant on the establishment of Amul Dairy. The applicant
called the complainant at Circuit House, Anand to meet the higher
authority of the Amul Dairy. However, the person, who came at the
circuit house, was not representing the Amul Dairy, but at the behest
of the applicant accused, he met the complainant. In the aforesaid
facts, the FIR came to be filed against the applicant accused for the
offence of cheating, criminal breach of Trust, cheating with intend to
forgery.
3. Mr. Vishal Anandjiwala, learned counsel and learned counsel Mr.
Yash Dave, appearing for the respective parties would urge that the
dispute between the parties amicably settled out of the Court and
therefore, if the FIR is quashed, the complainant original informant
has no objection. He would further submit that, considering the
nature of dispute, which is purely a private in nature, the further
continuation of the proceedings would not serve further purpose as
the possibility of conviction remote and/or bleak and therefore, the
proceeding may be quashed to secure the ends of justice.
4. On the other hand, learned APP Ms. Moxa Thakkar for the
respondent State, vehemently opposed the prayer of quashing,
contending that, the offence would not fall under the category of
private dispute as the applicant accused is habitual offender and
similar kind of offences are registered against him and therefore, the
offence committed cannot be termed as private offence but it is a
crime against the society and therefore in the larger interest of the
society, no case is made out to exercise inherent powers of this
Court.
R/CR.MA/81/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2023
5. Having considered the allegations leveled against the applicant
herein in the FIR and considering the settlement arrived at between
the parties, the issue arise for determination is whether case is made
out to quash FIR and consequential proceedings therefrom or not?
6. Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is saving of
inherent powers of the High Court says that nothing in this Code
shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High
Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect any
order under this Code or to prevent abuse of process of any court or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In other words, the inherent
jurisdiction of the High Court can be exercised to quash the criminal
proceedings in appropriate case, either to prevent any abuse of
process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. In Giansing Vs.
State of Punjab, 2012 (10) SCC 303, the Apex Court, discussed the
circumstances in which the High Court quashes the criminal
proceedings in case of non-compoundable offence, when there is a
settlement between the parties. In para-58 of the judgment, it is
observed and held that, certain offences which overwhelmingly and
pre-dominantly bear civil flavor and the wrong is basically to the
victim and offender, the High Court may within the framework of its
inherent powers, quashed the criminal proceedings. In another case,
[State of M.P. Vs. Laxminarayan, (2019)5 SCC 688], the Apex
Court, held and observed that, the offence which are private in
nature and do not have a serious impact on society, the High
Court after considering the antecedents of the accused, can
quash the proceedings.
R/CR.MA/81/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2023
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, the
applicant under the guise of false promise of job, duped the
complainant and obtained Rs.13 lacs and more, and that too, after
obtaining the amount issued a forged letter of employment, in the
name of Amul Dairy. It needs to be noted that, after some pressure
from the complainant, he arranged the meeting at the Circuit House,
under the pretext that, the higher authority of the Amul Dairy has
agreed to appoint him. Admittedly, in past also, the FIR registered
against the applicant for a similar kind of offences. Thus, this Court
is of the considered view that though the wrong committed with the
victim alone but permitting the parties to quash the proceedings
would directly impact on the society at large. In such circumstances,
considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case,
this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case to exercise
inherent powers in favour of the applicant and therefore, the
application deserves to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
P.S. JOSHI
