Gujarat High Court
Qureshi Hasanbhai Rasulbhai vs Bahelim Aliyarkhan Jivankhan Manager, ... on 3 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2151/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 2151 of 2025
==========================================================
QURESHI HASANBHAI RASULBHAI
Versus
BAHELIM ALIYARKHAN JIVANKHAN MANAGER, THE MANDAL CO.
OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. RAFIK LOKHANDWALA(5590) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 03/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Aditya Pancholi states that
he has instructions to appear for respondent-complainant. He
is permitted to file his Vakalatnama in the Registry within
two days and the Registry shall accept the same. He has
produced affidavit of the complainant, which is ordered to be
taken on record.
2. Learned advocate for the complainant has cited the
affidavit of the complainant, which is already taken on
record. Respondent-complainant is present before the Court
and admits correctness and genuineness of the affidavit filed
by him through his learned advocate. Learned advocate Mr.
Aditya Pancholi identifies respondent-complainant and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2151/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025
undefined
confirms correctness and genuineness of the affidavit filed by
him.
3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned A.P.P. and
learned advocate Mr. Aditya Pancholi waive service of Rule
for respondent Nos.1 and 2 respectively. Learned APP objects
quashment of present proceedings on the premise of
settlement.
4. With the consent of learned advocate for the
applicants and learned advocate for respondents, present
application is taken up for final disposal today.
5. By way of the present petition under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (`BNSS' for
short), the petitioner/s prays to quash and set aside the
order dated 09.05.2024 passed in Criminal Case No.2408 of
2023 by the learned 3
rd
Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Mahedana and consequential/subsequent proceedings, if any,
arising therefrom.
6. Heard learned advocates.
7. Learned advocate for the petitioner/s has taken this
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2151/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025
undefined
Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present
application.
8. At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have
amicably resolved the dispute. In support of such submission
made at the bar by the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties, they have placed on record affidavit of
settlement duly signed by the complainant.
9. Since now, the dispute with reference to the impugned
FIR is settled and resolved by and between parties, which is
confirmed by the original complainant through learned
advocate, in view of the judgment in the case of State of
Madhya Pradesh versus Laxmi Narayan reported in (2019) 5
SCC 688, more particularly, paragraph 15, this Court is of
the opinion that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of
the present case, when the parties have arrived at settlement
of dispute, the matter requires consideration for quashing of
criminal proceedings without entering into further
technicalities of the matter. Paragraph 15 reads as under:
"15. Considering the law on the point and the other
decisions of this Court on the point, referred to
hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2151/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025
undefined
15.1.That the power conferred under Section 482 of
the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the
non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of the
Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and
predominantly the civil character, particularly those
arising out of commercial transactions or arising out
of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and
when the parties have resolved the entire dispute
amongst themselves;
15.2.Such power is not to be exercised in those
prosecutions which involved heinous and serious
offences of mental depravity or offences like murder,
rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in
nature and have a serious impact on society;
15.3.Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for
the offences under the special statutes like the
Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences
committed by public servants while working in that
capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis
of compromise between the victim and the offender;
15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms
Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and
serious offences and therefore are to be treated as
crime against the society and not against the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2151/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025
undefined
individual alone, and therefore, the criminal
proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC
and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious
impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise
of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the
ground that the parties have resolved their entire
dispute amongst themselves. However, the High
Court would not rest its decision merely because
there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or
the charge is framed under this provision. It would
be open to the High Court to examine as to
whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there
for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected
sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to
framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this
purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go
by the nature of injury sustained, whether such
injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the
body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an
exercise by the High Court would be permissible
only after the evidence is collected after investigation
and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or
during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible
when the matter is still under investigation.
Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and
29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh
[Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/2151/2025 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2025
undefined
466 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54] should be read
harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the
circumstances stated hereinabove;
15.5 [Ed.: Para 15.5 corrected vide Official
Corrigendum No. F.3/Ed.B.J./22/2019 dated 3-4-2019.]
. While exercising the power under Section 482 of
the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in
respect of non-compoundable offences, which are
private in nature and do not have a serious impact
on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/
compromise between the victim and the offender, the
High Court is required to consider the antecedents
of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely,
whether the accused was absconding and why he
was absconding, how he had managed with the
complainant to enter into a compromise, etc.",
10. Resultantly, this application is allowed. The order dated
09.05.2024 passed in Criminal Case No.2408 of 2023 by the
learned 3rd Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahedana and
consequential/subsequent proceedings, if any, arising therefrom
is hereby quashed and set aside.
11. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
DIWAKAR SHUKLA
