Gujarat High Court
Chintan S/O Vrajlalbhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 26 October, 2023
Bench: J. C. Doshi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11895/2023 ORDER DATED: 26/10/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 11895 of 2023
==========================================================
CHINTAN S/O VRAJLALBHAI DAHYABHAI SANCHANIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
VISHAL K ANANDJIWALA(7798) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 26/10/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. S.M.Sindhi states that he has
received instructions to appear on behalf of the original
complainant and thereby, seeks permission to file his
Vakalatnama, which is granted. Heard learned advocates for
the respective parties. Registry is directed to accept the same.
2. Rule. Learned advocates waive service of notice of rule
on behalf of the respective respondents.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
since it is jointly stated at the bar by learned advocates on
both the sides that the dispute between the parties has been
resolved amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal
forthwith.
4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed to quash
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11895/2023 ORDER DATED: 26/10/2023
undefined
and set aside the complaint being C.R.No.11208001200037 of
2020 registered with Mahila Police Station, Rajkot City for the
offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 377, 504 and 506(2) of
Indian Penal Code and all the consequential proceedings
arising therefrom.
5. Learned advocates for the respective parties submitted
that during the pendency of proceedings, the parties have
settled the dispute amicably and pursuant to such mutual
settlement, the original complainant has filed an Affidavit,
which is taken on record. In her Affidavit, the victim has
categorically stated as under :-
"I further state that I have amicably settled the
dispute with the petitioner and there is nothing
left between us to proceed against the petitioner
and therefore, the present petition may be
allowed and the impugned FIR may be quashed
and set aside.
I submit that I had consensual physical
relationship with the petitioner, however, later on
due to misunderstanding and misconception the
FIR has come to be lodged against him. I further
state that I have amicably settled the dispute
with the petitioner and as on today there is
nothing left to proceed further against him. To
proceed further against the petitioner would be
nothing but mental agony and pain to us. I further
submit that at the time of recording the
statement u/s 164 of Cr.P.C., I was tutored by the
Investigating Officer and that such statement is
false. Therefore, the FIR may be quashed and set
aside to which I do not have any objection"
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11895/2023 ORDER DATED: 26/10/2023
undefined
5.1 The victim has further stated that that as the dispute with
the applicants has been resolved amicably, she has no
objection, if the present proceedings are quashed and set
aside since there is no surviving grievance between them.
5.2 In view of the above, the allegations made in the
impugned FIR would no longer survive and the discretion
requires to be exercised in favour of the applicants.
6. Ordinarily offence of rape being offence under public
interest cannot be quashed, however, in the peculiar facts,
where the victim who was major at the time of incident states
on oath that she had relationship with accused with mutual
consent, the case is required to be considered, more
particularly, if FIR is allowed to continue, it would be futile
exercise and there is less chance of conviction in the case.
Moreover, the parties have settled and continuance of criminal
case may be impediment in their life.
7. What more appears that the complainant has taken back
the allegations against the accused. In that circumstances,
criminal case against the accused become non-effective. At
this juncture, I may refer to the judgment of Madan Mohan
Abbot vs. State of Punjab [2008] 4 SCC 582 6].
Observations in paragraph 6 is relevant which reads thus:
"[6] We need to emphasis that it is perhaps advisable
that in disputes where the question involved is of a
purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept
the terms of the compromise even in criminal
proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no
possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11895/2023 ORDER DATED: 26/10/2023
undefined
luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they
are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be
utilized in deciding more effective and meaningful
litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter
based on ground of realities and benefit of the
technicalities of the law".
8. In view of above, in the opinion of this Court, the further
continuation of criminal proceedings against the applicants in
relation to the impugned FIR would cause unnecessary
harassment to the applicants. Further, the continuance of trial
pursuant to the mutual settlement arrived at between the
parties would be a futile exercise. Hence, to secure the ends of
justice, it would be appropriate to quash and set aside the
impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings initiated in
pursuance thereof under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C..
9. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned
complaint being C.R.No.11208001200037 of 2020 registered
with Mahila Police Station, Rajkot City as well as all
consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are
hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants herein. If the
applicants are in jail, the jail authority concerned is directed to
release the applicants forthwith, if not required in connection
with any other case. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is
permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SATISH
