[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Joshi Keyurbhai Hemantbhai vs The State Of Gujarat on 10 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10538/2013 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 10538 of 2013
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 9676 of 2013
==========================================================
JOSHI KEYURBHAI HEMANTBHAI
Versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KAIVAL D PATEL(13892) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. KULDEEP D VAIDYA(7045) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS. VRUNDA SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 10/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is preferred under Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing and
setting aside of the complaint registered as Criminal
Case No. 1918 of 2012 pending before the learned
Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Viramgam, and the
order passed by the learned Magistrate issuing process
under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
against the applicants for the offences punishable under
Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10538/2013 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026
undefined
2. At the outset, it is submitted that accused No. 1, namely
Mehta Mohanbhai Meghjibhai, has expired during the
pendency of the present application and therefore the
proceedings qua the said accused stand abated. Accused
No. 2, namely Dhartiben Keyurbhai Joshi, is the
applicant in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.
9676 of 2013 and accused No. 3, namely Keyurbhai
Hemantbhai Joshi, is the applicant in Criminal
Miscellaneous Application No. 10538 of 2013. It
emerges from the record that the offences alleged in the
complaint arise out of a private dispute and pertain to
non-payment of compensation. On the basis of the
allegations made in the complaint, the learned
Magistrate had issued process.
3. Learned advocates appearing for the respective parties
submitted that the dispute between the parties has now
been amicably settled. In support thereof, an affidavit of
the legal heirs of the original complainant, namely
Utamkumar Arjanbhai and Himanshukumar Arjanbhai
(sons of the complainant) and Ramilaben Arjanbhai (wife
of the complainant), has been placed on record. As per
the said affidavit, the parties have resolved the dispute
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10538/2013 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026
undefined
and the legal heirs of the complainant have given their
consent for quashing of the complaint. Himanshubhai
Arjanbhai, son of the complainant, is personally present
before this Court and has confirmed the factum of
settlement between the parties
4. 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 Apex 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 considered the latest decision of
the Apex Court in the case of 'Parbatbhai Aahir @
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10538/2013 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026
undefined
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 Apex
Court in the said decision, particularly Paragraph-15,
thereof. 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 482 of the Code.
5. In view of the above, the Criminal Case No. 1918 of
2012, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate
(First Class), Viramgam is quashed. Accordingly, all the
consequential proceedings are hereby quashed and set
aside.
6. The demand draft has been handed over in Court and
the same has been duly acknowledged by the son of the
complainant, who is present before this Court. The
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10538/2013 ORDER DATED: 10/03/2026
undefined
affidavit in that regard is directed to be taken on record.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
NIVYA A. NAIR
