[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Rohitkumar Ambalal Jani vs State Of Gujarat on 5 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 9420
of 2026
==========================================================
ROHITKUMAR AMBALAL JANI & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KAMLESH S KOTAI(6150) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MS. C.M. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 05/05/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Ms. Kiran R. Udasi submits that
she has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent
no.2 - original complainant and seeks permission to file her
appearance. Permission is granted. Registry to accept.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP Ms. C.M.
Shah and learned advocate Ms. Kiran R. Udasi waive service
of notice of rule for the respective respondents.
3. As the matter is amicably settled between the
parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
4. By way of this application under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicants
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
have prayed to quash and set aside the C.R.-I No.
11217030200582 of 2020 registered with Siddhpur Police
Station, District: Patan for the offences under Sections 294(b),
506(2), and 114 of the IPC and Sections 40 and 42 of the
Gujarat Money Lenders Act, 2011 and Criminal Case No. 456
of 2021 is pending before the learned Trial Court, Siddhpur.
5. Heard learned advocate Mr. Kamlesh S. Kotai for
the applicants, learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the
respondent no.1 - State and learned advocate Ms. Kiran R.
Udasi for the respondent no.2 - original complainant.
6. Learned advocate Mr. Kamlesh S. Kotai for the
applicant and learned advocate Ms. Kiran R. Udasi for the
respondent no.2 - original complainant jointly submits that
the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled.
The respondent no.2 - original complainant Mr. Brijeshbhai
Jagdishbhai Joshi is present in-person before the Court and
submit that the matter between the applicants - original
accused no. 3 - Gaurangkumar Hasubhai Patel and original
accused no. 6 - Rohitkumar Ambalal Jani has been amicably
settled and whatever financial transactions that had taken
place between them have been concluded with the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
intervention of all the members of their community and other
elders of the society, to that effect he produces an affidavit in
support of his submissions. Learned advocate further submits
that the respondent no.2 - original complainant does not wish
to prosecute the matter further. The compromise has been
entered into voluntarily, without any coercion, undue
influence or pressure and, therefore, the respondent no.2 has
no objection if the impugned FIR as well as all the other
consequential proceedings qua the original accused nos. 3
and 6 be quashed.
7. On inquiring, the respondent No.2 - original
complainant submits that the agreement has been arrived at
without any force, coercion, undue influence or threat from
any person but of his own free will and this Court is satisfy
that compromise has been entered into between the parties.
The affidavit filed by the respondent no. 2 is taken on record.
8. Learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the respondent
no.1 - State submits that the contents of the FIR are just and
proper; however, considering the fact that the dispute
between the parties is amicably settled, necessary order may
be passed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
9. The affidavit filed by the respondent no. 2 - original
complainant reads as under:
"I, BRIJESHBHAI JAGDISHBHAI JOSHI, Gender- Male,
Aged: 44 Years, Respondent no. 2 herein Original
Complainant, Residing at: Vraj Vatika Society,
Mahesana also Residing at: Govind Madhav Society,
Siddpur, Patan, the Original Complainant no.2 herein,
do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as
under :-
herein and I am fully conversant with facts and
circumstances of the case and I am duly competent to
file this affidavit. I have gone through the memo of
application filed by the applicants herein and I have
also pursued the relevant papers pertaining thereto.
2. I say and submit that I have lodged an FIR dated
22.06.2020 in being CR-I No. 11217030200582 of
2020 registered with Siddhpur Police Station, District:
Patan offences punishable under section 34, 386,
294(b), 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code and
under section 40 and 42 of Gujarat Money-Lenders
Act, 2011.
3. It is very respectfully submitted that the dispute
between us is private in nature. It is submitted that
now upon intervention of trusted persons of the
society, the matter has been resolved between us and
an amicable settlement has been arrived at. Now no
grievances what so ever in any nature exist between
us. Therefore, FIR is required to be quashed and set
aside the FIR in question.
4. In light of the above facts and circumstances I have
decided to withdraw the FIR in question which I have
lodged against the applicants. Therefore, I don't object
if the FIR and all prior and subsequent criminal
proceedings arising therefrom are quashed and set
aside.
5. It is further submitted that since the dispute in
question is resolved between me and the applicant
and it would be just and proper that the FIR dated
22.06.2020 in being CR-I No. 11217030200582 of
2020 registered with Siddhpur Police Station, District:
Patan offence punishable under section 34, 386,
294(b), 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
under section 40 and 42 of Gujarat Money-Lenders
Act, 2011 and all subsequent proceedings pursuant
thereto be quashed and set aside in the interest of
justice.
5. Further, it is submitted that I have carefully
considered the matter and after due deliberation,
after looking to the behaviour of the accused, the
original complainant has no objection if this Hon'ble
Court deems it fit to quash and set aside the
conviction to the accused- applicant herein. The
decision of the complainant in giving the no objection
to quash and set aside the conviction is made
voluntarily and without any coercion, undue influence
or pressure from any quarter.
5. That, the present affidavit is being filed for placing
the no-objection on record to the present quashing
application and to assist the Hon'ble Court in the fair
and just adjudication of the said application.
What is stated hereinabove is true to the best of my
personal knowledge, information and belief and I
believe the same to be true and correct."
10. So far as Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is concerned,
the Apex Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir Alias
Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur Vs. State of Gujarat
reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, has observed in Para-15 as
under:
"15. The broad principles which emerge from the
precedents on the subject, may be summarised in the
following propositions:
(i) Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of
the High Court to prevent an abuse of the
process of any court or to secure the ends of
justice. The provision does not confer new
powers. It only recognizes and preserves powers
which inherent the High Court;
(ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High
Court to quash a First Information Report or a
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
criminal proceeding on the ground that a
settlement has been arrived at between the
offender and the victim is not the same as the
invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of
compounding an offence. While compounding an
offence, the power of the court is governed by
the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash
under Section 482 is attracted even if the
offence is non-compoundable.
(iii) In forming an opinion whether a criminal
proceeding or complaint should be quashed in
exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482,
the High Court must evaluate whether the ends
of justice would justify the exercise of the
inherent power,
(iv) While the inherent power of the High Court has
a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be
exercised; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii)
to prevent an abuse of the process of any court;
(v) The decision as to whether a complaint or First
Information Report should be quashed on the
ground that the offender and victim have settled
the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and
circumstances of each case and no exhaustive
elaboration of principles can be formulated;
(vi) In the exercise of the power under Section 482
and while dealing with a plea that the dispute
has been settled, the High Court must have due
regard to the nature and gravity of the offence.
Heinous and serious offences involving mental
depravity or offences such as murder, rape and
dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed though
the victim or the family of the victim have
settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly
speaking, not private in nature but have a
serious impact upon society. The decision to
continue with the trial in such cases is founded
on the overriding element of public interest in
punishing persons for serious offences;
(vii) As distinguished from serious offences, there
may be criminal cases which have an
overwhelming or predominant element of a civil
dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar
as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is
concerned;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
(viii) Criminal cases involving offences which arise
from commercial, financial, mercantile,
partnership or similar transactions with an
essentially civil flavour may in appropriate
situations fall for quashing where parties have
settled the dispute;
(ix) In such a case, the High Court may quash the
criminal proceeding if in view of the
compromise between the disputants, the
possibility of a conviction is remote and the
continuation of a criminal proceeding would
cause oppression and prejudice; and
(x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out
in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic
offences involving the financial and economic
well-being of the State have implications which
lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute
between private disputants. The High Court
would be justified in declining to quash where
the offender is involved in an activity akin to a
financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour.
The consequences of the act complained of upon
the financial or economic system will weigh in
the balance."
11. Having heard the learned advocates for the
respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances
arising out of the present petition as well as taking into
consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian
Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10
SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab
& Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC) as well as State
of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it
appears that matter is amicably settled between the parties
and the trial would be futile and further continuance of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to
abuse of process of law and Court and hence, to secure the
ends of justice, the impugned FIR and other consequential
proceedings including Criminal Case No. 456 of 2021 is
pending before the learned Trial Court, Siddhpur are required
to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred
under Section 482 of the Code.
12. The occurrence involved in this case as purely
personal or having overtones of criminal proceedings of
private nature, the parties on their own volition, without any
coercion or compulsion, willingly and voluntarily have buried
their differences and wish to accord a quietus to their dispute
and considering that continuation of proceedings would serve
no useful purpose, this Court is satisfied that the matter
deserves to be brought to an end by exercising inherent
jurisdiction.
13. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.
14. The impugned C.R.-I No. 11217030200582 of 2020
registered with Siddhpur Police Station, District: Patan as
well as and other consequential proceedings including
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/9420/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
Criminal Case No. 456 of 2021 pending before the learned
Trial Court, Siddhpur initiated in pursuance thereof are
hereby quashed and set aside qua the present applicants only
i.e. original accused no. 3 - Gaurangkumar Hasubhai Patel
and original accused no. 6 - Rohitkumar Ambalal Jani.
15. Connected application/s, if any, stand/s disposed of.
16. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(S. V. PINTO,J)
ROHAN SONI
