Gujarat High Court
Nextgen Enterprise Through Rushikesh ... vs State Of Gujarat on 11 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11187/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 11187 of 2024
==========================================================
NEXTGEN ENTERPRISE THROUGH RUSHIKESH JAYANTIKUMAR
RAJVANSHI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
O I PATHAN(7684) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TRUPESH KATHIRIYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 11/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr.Naved Shaikh states that he
has instructions to appear for respondent-complainant.
He is permitted to file his Vakalatnama in the Registry
within three working days from today and the Registry
shall accept the same. The affidavit of the complainant
is already on record.
2. Learned advocates for the parties have drawn the
attention of this Court to the affidavit of the complainant.
The Respondent-complainant is present before the Court and
he submits that he is the Account Manager and that he is
having authority to settle the dispute and as the amount is
received by the company, he has filed the affidavit. He
admits the correctness and genuineness of the affidavit filed
through the learned advocate. Learned advocate Mr.Shaikh
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11187/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
identifies the respondent-complainant and confirms correctness
and genuineness of the affidavit.
3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned A.P.P. and
learned advocate Mr.Shaikh 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
petition 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
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (`the Code' for
short), the petitioner/s prays to quash and set aside the
order dated 23.4.2024 passed in Criminal Case No.918
of 2021 by the learned 6
th
Additional Civil Judge and
Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahesana
and consequential/subsequent proceedings, if any, arising
therefrom.
6. Heard learned advocates.
7. Learned advocate for the petitioner/s has taken
this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11187/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
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/SCR.A/11187/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
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 individual alone, and therefore, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11187/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
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 466
: (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54] should be read harmoniously and
to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated
hereinabove;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/11187/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/02/2025
undefined
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 23.4.2024 passed in Criminal Case No.918 of 2021
by the learned 6
th
Additional Civil Judge and Additional
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahesana 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)
SRILATHA
