Gujarat High Court
Rahul Prabhatsinh Zala vs State Of Gujarat on 12 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14463/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 14463 of 2024
==========================================================
RAHUL PRABHATSINH ZALA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YASH V GUPTA(11814) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
VISHAL K ANANDJIWALA(7798) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 12/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Yash Dave 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.
Yash Dave identifies respondent-complainant and confirms
correctness and genuineness of the affidavit filed by him.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14463/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/02/2025
undefined
3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned A.P.P. and
learned advocate Mr. Yash Dave 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 application under Section
528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for
short, `BNSS'), the applicant/s prays for quashing the FIR
being C.R.No.11187002240359/2024 registered with Police
Station Balasinor, Mahisagar for the offences mentioned
therein and further proceedings arising out of the same, if
any.
6. Heard learned advocates. Learned advocate for the
applicants has taken this Court through the factual matrix
arising out of the present application.
7. At the outset, it is submitted that the parties
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14463/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/02/2025
undefined
have amicably resolved the dispute. In support of such
submission made at bar by the learned advocates appearing
for the respective parties, they have placed on record affidavit
of settlement of dispute duly signed by the respondent-
complainant.
8. 8. Learned APP Mr. Shruti Pathak has raised strong
objection as offences are under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and
has submitted that in such matters, even if consent is given
by the complainants, such proceedings are not required to be
quashed.
9. In response to that, learned advocate Mr. Vishal
Anandjiwala for the petitioner has submitted that now, there
are several judgments, whereby the Courts have opined that
in case of Section 376 of the I.P.C., where the POCSO is not
invoked and if there is consensual prolonged relationship, the
matters are required to be considered for quashing of the
proceeding and, therefore, he has submitted that even on
merits also, considering the fact that both the petitioner as
well as complainant is marriage in their own life and
thereafter, having extramarital relationship and repeated
incident of such relationship is there and, therefore, such
proceeding is required to be quashed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14463/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/02/2025
undefined
10 This Court has considered the above aspects.
Accordingly, these aspects are required to be considered by
considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the
case, and in the present case, when both the persons are
married and thereafter, have willingly entered into
extramarital affair. This Court should also consider the
difference between the consensual relationship and the case of
rape. Here, prima facie, it is a case of consensual
relationship. Moreover, now the complainant is willingly
giving consent for quashing. Therefore, considering the
peculiar facts of the case, the present matter has been
considered accordingly.
11. Furthermore, since now, the dispute with reference to
the impugned F.I.R. is settled and resolved by and between
parties which is confirmed by the original complainant
through his learned advocate, in view of the decision in case
of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another, reported in
(2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab and another reported in 2014(2) Crime 67 (SC) and
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and
others Vs. State of Gujarat, recorded on Criminal Appeal
No.1723 of 2017 dated 4.10.2017, more particularly,
paragraph 15 thereof, the trial would be futile and any
further continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/14463/2024 ORDER DATED: 12/02/2025
undefined
process of law. Therefore, the impugned F.I.R. is required to
be quashed and set aside.
12. Resultantly, this application is allowed. Impugned
F.I.R. being C.R.No.11187002240359/2024 registered with
Police Station Balasinor, Mahisagar for the offences mentioned
therein and all other consequential proceedings arising out of
said FIR are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicant
only.
13. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
DIWAKAR SHUKLA
