[Cites 11, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Munna Harendra Gupta vs State Of Gujarat on 23 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5953/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 5953
of 2026
==========================================================
MUNNA HARENDRA GUPTA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. RUCHI V SINGH(8933) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 23/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Ms. Raksha Khated appears and submits
that she has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent
no.2 - complainant and the victim. She is permitted to file her
appearance. Registry shall accept her vakalatnama.
2. By way of filing the present application under Section 528
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant-
accused has prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being CR.
No.11210045251039 of 2025 registered with the Pandesara
Police Station, District - Surat, for the offences punishable under
Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, under Sections 3(a), 4, 5(j)(2), 5(k), 5(l) and 6 of the POCSO
Act, the charge-sheet, as well as the proceedings of the Special
(Pocso) Case No.159 of 2025 pending before the learned 8 th
Additional Sessions Judge, Pocso Court, Surat, so also all other
consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto qua the
present applicant.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5953/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026
undefined
3. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Manan Maheta
waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.1 - State.
4. At the outset, learned advocate Ms. Raksha Khated
appearing for complainant and the victim has submitted that at
the time of the alleged incident, the victim was aged about 17
years and 07 months, whereas the accused was aged about 23
years. It is further submitted that both of them were in love with
each other and they had eloped together, and when the victim
attained the age of majority, they both got married on
17.02.2026. In support of the said contention, learned advocate
Ms. Khated has produced the marriage certificate, which
suggests that the marriage of the applicant and the victim has
been registered on 10.03.2026 before the Registrar of Marriages,
Central Zone, Surat Municipal Corporation, and now they are
happily residing together. Therefore, she has urged that since the
dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved, the trial
would be a futile exercise and further continuation of the
proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.
5. Learned APP Mr. Manan Maheta appearing for the
respondent - State has submitted that considering the
seriousness and gravamen of the offence, this Court many not
exercise discretion in favour of the present applicant and the
application may be rejected.
6. The victim-girl is personally present before this Court and
has submitted that the matter has been amicably resolved with
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5953/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026
undefined
the applicant-accused, therefore, she does not want to proceed
further with the matter. She has further submitted that there is
no grievance against the present applicant-accused. The
complainant and the victim girl have filed their respective
affidavits dated 13.02.2026, which are annexed at Annexure- B to
the application.
7. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the
complainant read thus:-
"2. say that I have gone through the memo of petition and
the facts and grounds stated in the memo petition are not
disputed by me. At the outset I say and submit that the
disputes and grievances of both the sides have been
amicably settled and I have no grievance against the
applicants.
3. In the facts and circumstances as narrated above, I at my
free will, wish and desire am stating on oath that I do not
wish to prosecute further against the applicants and as the
dispute between us has been amicably settled. I state that
impugned F.I.R. being 11210045251039/2025 lodged at
Pandesara Police City Surat Station, for the under Sections 14
3(a),4,5 (J)(2), 137(2),87,64 (2) (M) and U/S. 5(k),5(1), 6 of
POCSO Act 2012 and Charge-sheet is filled may kindly be
quashed."
8. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the victim-
girl read thus:-
"2. of I say that I have gone through the memo of petition and the
facts and grounds stated in the memo petition are not disputed by
me. At the outset I say and submit that the disputes and grievances
of both the sides have been amicably settled and I have no
grievance against the applicants.
3. In the facts and circumstances as narrated above, I at my free
will, wish and desire am stating on oath that I do not wish to
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5953/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026
undefined
prosecute further against the applicants and as the dispute between
us has been amicably settled. I state that impugned F.I.R. being
11210045251039/2025lodged at Pandesara Police Station, Surat
City for the offence under Sections 137(2),87,64(2) (M) and U/S.
3(a),4,5 (J) (2),5(k),5(1), 6 of POCSO Act 2012 and Charge-sheet is
filled may kindly be quashed."
9. Having heard learned advocate for the complainant and the
victim as well as the victim and the complainant, so also taking
into consideration the affidavits filed by the victim and the
complainant along with the decisions of the Supreme Court
rendered 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 continuing further with the criminal proceedings in
relation to the impugned FIR and the Special Pocso Case against
the applicant-accused would be nothing but unnecessary
harassment to the applicant-accused, and it would be a futile
exercise.
10. Considering the nature of the dispute between the parties
as well as considering the peculiar aspect, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the matter requires consideration. The
continuation of the trial would be a futile exercise since the star
witness, who herself is the victim, does not want to continue
further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR and
the Special Pocso Case. It, therefore, appears that the same
would amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, to secure
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5953/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026
undefined
the ends of justice, the impugned FIR as well as the proceedings
of the Special Pocso Case are required to be quashed and set
aside in exercise of the inherent powers conferred under Section
528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
11. In the result, the application is allowed. The FIR being CR.
No.11210045251039 of 2025 registered with the Pandesara
Police Station, District - Surat, for the offences punishable under
Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, under Sections 3(a), 4, 5(j)(2), 5(k), 5(l) and 6 of the POCSO
Act, the charge-sheet, as well as the proceedings of the Special
(Pocso) Case No.159 of 2025 pending before the learned 8 th
Additional Sessions Judge, Pocso Court, Surat, so also all other
consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are also
quashed and set-aside qua the present applicant.
12. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
prk
