Rushil Mahendrakumar Mayatra vs Sonalben D/O. Manubhai ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 584 Guj

   R/SCR.A/7547/2015                         ORDER DATED: 19/01/2023




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 7547 of 2015

==========================================================
             RUSHIL MAHENDRAKUMAR MAYATRA
                          Versus
    SONALBEN D/O. MANUBHAI GIRDHARBHAI NAGAR & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
KSHITIJ M AMIN(7572) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RAJESH K KANANI(2157) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS. M. D. MEHTA, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 2
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI

                         Date : 19/01/2023

                           ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Kshitij M. Amin appearing for

the applicant and learned APP Ms. M. D. Mehta on behalf of

the respondent - State.

2. By way of this application, the applicant seeks quashment of

the FIR being C. R. No. I-118 of 2013 registered with the

Adalaj Police Station, Gandhinagar for offence punishable

under Sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The said FIR

being registered on 31.08.2013.

3. Learned Advocate Mr. Amin would submit that perusal of the

R/SCR.A/7547/2015 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2023

FIR would reveal that as such the crux of the allegations were

against the accused no. 1 whereas even though the present

applicant was not named in the FIR, he had been arraigned as

accused in the charge sheet. The only role attributable to the

present applicant being that he had gone along with the

principal accused to a particular spot where the alleged

incident has happened. As such there is no allegation of the

applicant having committed any overt act or any abetment to

the principal alleged offence.

3.1. Learned Advocate Mr. Amin would also draw the

attention of this Court to judgment and order dated 06.01.2020

passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Court,

Gandhinagar in Sessions Case No. 33 of 2014, whereby

according learned Advocate Mr. Amin, the trial against the

principal accused arising from the impugned FIR had

proceeded and the learned Sessions Court had acquitted the

principal accused. Learned Advocate Mr. Amin would also

take this Court to certain observations in the judgment

R/SCR.A/7547/2015 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2023

whereby it would be revealed that the principal accused and

the complainant appearing to have reached some kind of

settlement. Learned Advocate Mr. Amin would therefore

submit that the principal accused having been acquitted by the

learned Sessions Court after a full-fledged trial and since it has

come on record that there is some kind of settlement between

the principal accused and the complainant and since there is no

role whatsoever attributable to the present applicant and since

it appears that the complainant is not interested in pursuing the

matter therefore, this application may be considered and

impugned FIR may be quashed qua the applicant herein.

3.2 Learned advocate Mr. Kshitij Amin appearing for the

applicant has submitted that another co-accused namely Neel

Vikrambhai Shah against whom identical role is alleged has

also preferred an application for quashing being Special

Criminal Application No. 593 of 2015 before this Court and

the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

04.03.2022 has quashed and set aside the impugned FIR and

further proceedings arising therefrom in respect of the

R/SCR.A/7547/2015 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2023

aforesaid co-accused and the present applicant is the only

accused person against whom the proceedings are going on at

present.

4. Learned APP Ms. Mehta on behalf of the respondent-State

would submit that though the allegation leveled in the FIR

were very serious in nature but the fact of the applicant having

not been named in the FIR and no specific role being

attributable to the applicant in the charge sheet cannot be

denied. Learned APP Ms. Mehta would further submit that

having regard to the subsequent developments, this Court may

pass appropriate orders.

5. Learned APP Ms. M. D. Mehta appearing for the respondent -

State could not dispute the fact that except for the present

applicant now there are no proceedings against any of the

accused persons as the main accused has already been

acquitted by the Sessions Court and proceedings against the

co-accused namely Neel Vikrambhai Shah has been quashed

by this Court vide order dated 04.03.2022 in Special Criminal

R/SCR.A/7547/2015 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2023

Application No. 593 of 2015.

6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused

the FIR as well as the charge-sheet papers and I have also

perused the judgment of the Trial Court in respect of the main

accused in Sessions Case No. 33 of 2014 wherein the Trial

Court vide order dated 06.01.2020 passed by 3 rd Additional

Sessions Court, Gandhinagar has acquitted the main accused

and in the said judgment, it is categorically observed in

paragraph no. 16.2 that compromise has been arrived at

between the main accused person and the victim.

7. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and having considered

the FIR as well as the charge sheet papers annexed with the

petition and having appreciated the judgment passed by the

learned Sessions Court acquitting the principal accused, this

Court finds considerable substance in the submission of

learned Advocate Mr. Amin. It appears to this Court that in

addition to there being no specific allegations against the

present applicant, the principal accused and the complainant

R/SCR.A/7547/2015 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2023

have arrived at some kind of settlement based on which, the

complainant had resiled from her original allegation before the

Police against the principal accused resulting in the acquital of

the principal accused. This Court has also considered the

endorsements of the Police Inspector, Ravpura Police Station

as observed herein above, which reflect that the complainant is

not keen to pursue the application, more particularly, since it is

stated that complainant does not reside in Vadodara any more

and the complainant has informed that she will not be coming

to Vadodara for next 6 months since she was at Amritsar and

from where she would shift to Bombay.

8. Further this Court has perused the order dated 04.03.2022

passed by the Coordinate Bench in Special Criminal

Application No. 593 of 2015 in respect of co-accused - Neel

Vikrambhai Shah against whom the allegations are of

identical nature. Considering the fact that the allegations

against the present petitioner and co-accused - Neel

Vikrambhai Shah were of identical nature and considering the

fact that learned APP could not point out any other

R/SCR.A/7547/2015 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2023

distinguishing role attributed to the present applicant as

compared to the co-accused Neel Vikrambhai Shah, the

impugned FIR as well as further proceedings arising out of the

same FIR are required to be quashed and set aside and the

same are quashed and set aside accordingly.

9. In view of above, the present application is disposed of . Rule

is made absolute. No order as to costs.

Direct service is permitted.

(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) VARSHA DESAI