Gujarat High Court
Rajendrasinh Laxmansinh Rathod vs State Of Gujarat on 9 July, 2025
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13304/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING)
NO. 13304 of 2025
=====================================================
RAJENDRASINH LAXMANSINH RATHOD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
=====================================================
Appearance:
MR NAVED MOHAMMAD A SHAIKH(12949) for the
Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
=====================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 09/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for
the respective parties. Learned advocate Mr. Mehul
S. Padaliya states that he has an instructions to
appear for the respondent No.2 - complainant. He is
permitted to file her appearance forthwith.
2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor
as well as learned advocate appearing for the
Complainant waive service of Rule on behalf of the
respective respondents.
3. Considering the issue involved in the
present application and with consent of the learned
advocates appearing for the respective parties as
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13304/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst
the applicant and respondent No.2 has been resolved
amicably, this application is taken up for final
disposal forthwith.
4. By way of this application under Section
528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(hereinafter referred to as "BNSS"), the applicant
has prayed for quashing and setting aside judgment
and order dated 04.12.2024 passed by 5th Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural),
Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No.18172 of 2022 by which
the applicant came to be convicted under Section 138
of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant has
taken this Court through the factual matrix arising
out of the present application. At the outset, it is
submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the
issue and therefore, any further continuance of the
proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR as well as
any further proceedings arising therefrom would
create hardship to the applicant. It is submitted
that respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit in these
proceedings and has declared that the dispute between
the applicant and respondent No.2 is resolved due to
intervention of trusted persons of the society. It is
further submitted that in view of the fact that the
dispute is resolved, the trial would be futile and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13304/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
any further continuance of the proceedings would
amount to abuse of process of law. It is therefore
submitted that this Court may exercise its inherent
powers conferred under Section 528 of the BNSS and
allow the application as prayed for.
Learned advocate appearing for the
applicant, upon instructions, makes a statement that
the applicant is ready and willing to deposit a sum
of Rs.10,000/- towards the cost before the registry
of this Court within a period of two weeks from today
and he does not have any objection if the said amount
is disbursed in favour of Gujarat State Legal
Services Authority.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the State has opposed the present
application and submitted that considering the
seriousness of the offence, the complaint in question
may not be quashed and the present application may be
rejected.
7. Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has
reiterated the contentions raised by the learned
advocate for the applicant. The learned advocate for
respondent No.2 also relied upon the Authority letter
of the Finance Company and affidavit filed by
Authorized Signatory of the Finance Company -
respondent No. 2 - Balrajbhai Sankariya dated
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13304/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
09.07.2025. Respondent No.2 is present in person
before the Court and are identified by learned
advocate for respondent No.2. On inquiry made by the
Court, he has declared before this Court that he has
received the cheque amount from the applicant and
that the dispute between them is resolved due to
intervention of trusted persons of the society and
therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. He
also submitted that he has no objection if the
impugned judgment convicting the present applicant is
quashed. It is therefore submitted that the present
application may be allowed.
8. Having heard the learned advocates
appearing for the respective parties, considering the
facts and circumstances arising out of the present
application as well as taking into consideration the
decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.,
reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot Vs.
State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil
Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.,
reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma Vs. State &
Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh
& Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014
(2) Crime 67 (SC), it appears that further
continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to
the impugned FIR against the applicant would be
unnecessary harassment to the applicant. I have also
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13304/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
considered the latest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai
Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat,
Criminal Appeal No.1723 of 2017 dated 4.10.2017 and
the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the said decision, particularly paragraph 15.
Considering the nature of disputes between the
parties which are all private in nature, I am of the
opinion that the matter requires consideration. It
appears that the trial would be futile and further
continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the
impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law
and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the
impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside
in exercise of powers conferred under Section 528 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
9. Resultantly, this application is allowed
and the impugned judgment and order dated 04.12.2024
passed by 5th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Ahmedabad (Rural), Ahmedabad in Criminal Case
No.18172 of 2022 is hereby quashed and set aside qua
the applicant on condition that the applicant shall
deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the cost before
the Registry of this Court within a period of two
weeks from today. The applicant is also directed to
file an undertaking to the above effect before the
Registry of this Court within a period of one week
from today.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/13304/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
It is made clear that this order shall come
into force only upon deposit of the amount directed
above and production of receipt thereof. Upon
deposit of the above amount of cost with the Registry
of this Court, the Registry is directed to disburse
the said amount of cost in favour of Gujarat State
Legal Services Authority forthwith.
Accordingly, Rule is made absolute. Direct
service is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
Pallavi
