Gujarat High Court
Savan Sureshbhai Zalavadiya (Petition ... vs State Of Gujarat on 2 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12216/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 12216 of 2024
==========================================================
SAVAN SURESHBHAI ZALAVADIYA (petition disposed of as not press order
dated 25/09/2024) & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
APPEARANCE DELETED for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. KUSH N. BAVISHI(14121) for the Applicant(s) No. 2,3,4
MR PRATIK Y JASANI(5325) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR MANAN GUPTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 02/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Mr. Pratik Jasani, learned advocate submits that the
matter is amicably settled between the parties, in this regard has
produced on record an affidavit.Processing...Please Wait
2. The affidavit is taken on record.
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 528 of the
Bhartiya Nayay Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C."),
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12216/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
the applicants have prayed to quash and set aside the complaint
being FIR C.R. No.11208001240013 of 2024 registered with
Mahila Police Station, Rajkot City.
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 also filed an Affidavit, which is taken /
placed on record. In the Affidavit, the original complainant has
categorically stated that the dispute with the applicant/s has
been resolved amicably and that he has no objection, if the
present proceedings are quashed and set aside since there is no
surviving grievance between them.
6. Having heard learned advocates on both the sides and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears
that it appears that due to continuous mental and physical
harassment by her in-laws, the complainant has filed the
present complaint. The allegations are general in nature such as
instigating and verbally harassing the complainant. However,
now the matter is amicably settled between the parties and in
this regard, the complainant has filed an affidavit stating that
she has no objection if the complaint is quashed. Therefore, no
fruitful purpose would be served to proceed with the matter.
7. In view of the above, as the principle laid down by the Apex
Court in the cases of (i) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.,
reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, (ii) Madan Mohan Abbot Vs.
State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, (iii) Nikhil
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12216/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in
2009 (1) GLH 31, (iv) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in
2009 (1) GLH 190 and (v) Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), in the opinion
of this Court, the further continuation of criminal proceedings
against the applicant/s in relation to the impugned FIR would
cause unnecessary harassment to the applicant/s. 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 528 of the Bhartiya
Nayay Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/482 of the Cr.P.C..
8. It appears that petitioners are facing charge of Section
498A of IPC. Therefore, as per the allegations made in the
complaint, ingredient of Section 498A is made out. In this
regard, it would be apposite to refer the decisions of the Apex
Court in case of Abhishek vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported
in 2023INSC779 / (Criminal Appeal No. 1457 of 2015) and in
case of Preeti Gupta and another vs. State of Jharkhand and
another [(2010) 7 SCC 667], it is observed that "this Court noted
that the tendency to implicate the husband and all his
immediate relations is also not uncommon in complaints filed
under Section 498A IPC. It was observed that the Courts have to
be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these
complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration
while dealing with matrimonial cases, as allegations of
harassment by husband's close relations, who were living in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12216/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2025
undefined
different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where
the complainant resided, would add an entirely different
complexion and such allegations would have to be scrutinised
with great care and circumspection".
9. Even in the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of Achin Gupta v. State of Haryana, 2024 INSC 369, the
same view was observed. It is a clear case of over-implication.
Prima facie, it appears that with ulterior motives, the present
applicants are being falsely dragged into litigation. This is a clear
case of over-implication, and no purpose would be served by
proceeding further with the litigation. In view of the above, it
appears that with a view to exerting pressure on the applicants
to settle the dispute with the husband, the present applicants
are being dragged into litigation, thereby abusing the process of
law. Hence, the present impugned complaint is required to be
quashed and set aside.
10. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned
complaint being C C.R. No.11208001240013 of 2024 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. Rule is made
absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ALI
