Gujarat High Court
Luhar Kaushikkumar Manilala vs State Of Gujarat on 14 October, 2025
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21682/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO.21682 of 2025
==========================================================
LUHAR KAUSHIKKUMAR MANILALA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance :
MR MAHENDRA U VORA for the Applicant.
MR ADITYASINH JADEJA, APP for the Respondent No.1.
MS ARCHANA GOSWAMI for the Respondent No.2.
=========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 14/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties. Learned advocate Ms. Archana Goswami states
that she has an instructions to appear for the respondent No.2 -
complainant. She 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 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21682/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
as "BNSS"), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting
aside judgment and order dated 18.4.2025 passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dantivada, Banaskantha in Criminal
Case No.1444 of 2022 by which the applicant came to be convicted
for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act and was sentenced to simple imprisonment for a
period of two years. The applicant was also directed to pay amount
of Rs.10,54,000/- failing which the applicant was sentenced to
simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The applicant
has also challenged the judgment and order dated 25.9.2025
passed by learned 6th Additional District Judge, Deesa @
Banaskantha in Criminal Appeal No.134 of 2025 by which the
appeal of the applicant came to be dismissed.
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
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 for the applicant, upon instructions,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21682/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
states that the applicant is ready and willing to deposit a sum of
Rs.80,000/- towards the cost before the Registry of this Court
within a period of six weeks from today.
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
affidavit filed by respondent No.2 - Lalitkumar Punamchand Tank
dated 14.10.2025. Respondent No.2 is present in person before the
Court and is identified by learned advocate for respondent No.2.
On inquiry made by the Court, respondent No.2 has declared
before this Court that the dispute between the applicant and
respondent No.2 is resolved due to intervention of trusted persons
of the society and therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21682/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
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 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 (i) judgment and order dated 18.4.2025 passed by
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dantivada, Banaskantha in
Criminal Case No.1444 of 2022 as well as (ii) judgment and order
dated 25.9.2025 passed by learned 6 th Additional District Judge,
Deesa @ Banaskantha in Criminal Appeal No.134 of 2025 are
hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicant on condition that
the applicant shall deposit a sum of Rs.80,000/- towards the
cost before the Registry of this Court within a period of six
weeks from today. The applicant is also directed to file an
undertaking to the above effect with the Registry of this Court
within a period of one week from today. The Registry thereafter
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/21682/2025 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2025
undefined
shall disburse the said amount in favour of High Court Legal
Services Committee.
It is made clear that this order shall come into force
only upon deposit of the amount directed above and production of
receipt thereof. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute. Direct service
is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
SAVARIYA
