[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Shivam Piyushbhai Brahmbhatt vs State Of Gujarat on 5 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO.
8506 of 2026
========================================================
SHIVAM PIYUSHBHAI BRAHMBHATT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
========================================================
Appearance:
JAIVIK UDAY BHATT(7319) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. VATSAL D. RUPAREL(14194) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS CM SHAH for the Respondent(s) No. 1
========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 05/05/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP Ms. C.M.
Shah and learned advocate Mr. Vatsal Ruparel waive service of
notice of rule for the respective respondents.
2. As the matter is amicably settled between the
parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
3. By way of this application under Section 528 of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicants have
prayed to quash and set aside the FIR No.1119002250483 of 2025
registered with Bapod Police Station, Vadodara City for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
offences under Sections 64(2)(m) of the BNS, 2023 and under
Section 3(a), 4, 5(L),5(J)(2), 6 etc. of of the POCSO Act and
Special POCSO Case No. 141 of 2025 pending before the
Special Court, Vadodara.
4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Jaivik Uday Bhatt for the
applicant, learned APP Ms. C.M.Shah for the respondent no.1 -
State and learned advocate Mr. Vatsal Ruparel for the
respondent no.2 - original complainant.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Jaivik Uday Bhatt for the
applicant and learned advocate Mr. Vatsal Ruparel for the
respondent no.2 - original complainant jointly submit that the
dispute between the parties has been amicably settled as the
daughter of the complainant i.e. victim and the applicant were in
relationship and got married on 19.02.2025 and the marriage
certificate issued by the competent authority is produced on
record. Learned advocates further submit that the respondent
no. 2 - original complainant is present in person along with her
affidavit in support of their submissions. The respondent no.2 -
original complainant does not wish to prosecute the matter
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
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 arising
pursuant thereto are quashed against the applicant - accused.
6. On inquiry, the respondent No.2 - original
complainant submits that the applicant and her daughter - the
victim were in a love relationship and at the time of the incident,
the victim was aged 17 years and 09 months. They were in a
love relationship for a long time and wanted to get married to
each other, but due to her age they could not get married.
Thereafter, with the consent of their families, their marriage has
been solemnized and registered on 27.03.2026 and at present,
the applicant and the daughter of the complainant are residing
together. The agreement has been arrived at without any force,
coercion, undue influence or threat from any person but of their
own free will and this Court is satisfied that the compromise has
been entered into between the parties. The affidavit filed by the
respondent no. 2 as well as the victim is taken on record.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
7. 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.
8. The affidavit filed by the respondent no. 2 - original
complainant reads as under:
"I Nita Bhikhabhai Rajput, aged about 43 years, having
residence at House No. 84-85, Ganeshnagar Society, B/
H. Rangvatika Temple, Bopad Jakatnaka, Waghodiya
Road, Vadodara. I am the First informant in the FIR
registered as C.R. No. 11196002250483 of 2025
registered with Bopad Police Station under S. 64(2)(M)
of BNS and S. 3(A), 4, 5(L), 5(J)(2), 6 of the POCSO Act,
herein, do hereby takes on oath and solemnly affirm on
oath as under:
1. 1. That I have gone through the copy of the
memo of petition of Criminal Misc.
Application no. 8506 of 2026, filed by the
present applicant/petitioner. I state and
submit that FIR was registered by me.
2. I further state and submit that after
registration of the above mentioned FIR,
chargesheet came to be filed and then after
Special POCSO case No. 141 of 2025 was
registered with the Special Pocso Court,
Vadodara on basis of said FIR and
Chargesheet.
3. I further submit that my daughter namely
Hemangi was 17 years and 9 months old
when the present FIR was registered
against the petitioner herein.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
4. That after filing of the above mentioned
FIR, I along with the prosecutrix (Victim)
has settled the dispute and now we don't
want to proceed further with the
proceeding of the FIR or case pending
before the Special Pocso Court, Vadodara.
It is to submit that my daughter along with
the petitioner were in a relationship and
were wanting to marry at the relevant point
of time itself, however, due to age
constrain we could not marry and
therefore, there was some
misunderstanding at our ends which has
resulted into lodgment of the present FIR in
a hasty manner.
5. It is to submit that as our family i.e. I along
with my family members and family of
petitioner agreed for the marriage of the
petitioner with my daughter, as they were
in love since long and therefore, ultimately
thier marriage was solemnised on
19/2/2026 at Sinor Village of Vadodara
district. Further they both are staying
together since then and leaving the happy
married life. It is to note that the marriage
as also registered with the competent
authority and marriage registration
certificate was also issued for the same on
27/03/2026. A copy of the marriage
certificate dated 27/03/2026 is annexed
hereto and marked as "ANNEXURE-I" to
this affidavit.
6. As our family and family of petitioner
agreed for their marriage as they were in
love since long and ultimately their
marriage was solemnised on 19/2/2026 at
Sinor Village of Vadodara district. Further
they both are staying together since then
and leaving the happy married life.
7. Further I submit that we have arrived at
settlement without any monetary gain, nor
we have been pressurized by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
petitioners herein for the purpose of
settlement
8. Further I submit that in view of the
settlement arrived in between the parties
and now prosecutrix and petitioner being
married to each other, considering the said
facts if the proceeding arising out of the
above mentioned FIR is quashed by the
Hon'ble High Court then in that case no
prejudice is likely to be caused to the
deponent herein.
9. In view of the above facts and
circumstances in urged this Hon'ble Court
to allow the present petition. It is also to
state that I was personal present before this
Hon'ble Court on 30/04/2026 and I had
confirmed the fact of the settlement as well
as marriage with the petitioner before the
Hon'ble Court.
10. I state that what ever is stated herein above
is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief and I
believe same to be true."
9. The affidavit filed by the victim reads as under:
"I Hemangi Bhikhabhai Rajput W/O. Shivam Piyushbhai
Brahmbhatt, aged about 18 years, having residence at
B-9, House No. 108, Urban Residency 1, Nr. Vaikunth
Soceity, Waghodiya Road, Vadodara. I am the
prosecutrix in the FIR registered as C.R. No.
11196002250483 of 2025 registered with Bopad Police
Station under S. 64(2)(M) of BNS and S. 3(A), 4, 5(L), 5(J)
(2), 6 of the POCSO Act, herein, do hereby takes on
oath and solemnly affirm on oath as under:
1. That I have gone through the copy of the
memo of petition of Criminal Misc.
Application no. 8506 of 2026, filed by the
present applicant/petitioner. I state and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
submit that FIR was registered by my
mother namely Nitaben Bhikhabhai Rajput.
2. I further state and submit that after
registration of the above mentioned FIR,
chargesheet came to be filed and then after
Special POCSO case No. 141 of 2025 was
registered with the Special Pocso Court,
Vadodara on basis of said FIR and
Chargesheet.
3. I further submit that I was 17 years and 9
months old when the present FIR was
registered against the petitioner herein.
4. That after filing of the above mentioned
FIR, I along with the First Informant has
settled the dispute and now we don't want
to proceed further with the proceeding of
the FIR or case pending before the Special
Pocso Court, Vadodara. It is to submit that
the I along with the petitioner were in a
relationship and were wanting to marry at
the relevant point of time itself, however,
due to age constrain we could not marry
and therefore, there was some
misunderstanding at the end of the my
family which has resulted into lodgment of
the present FIR in a hasty manner.
5. It is to submit that as our family i.e. my
family and family of petitioner agreed for
our marriage, as we were in love since
long and therefore, ultimately our marriage
was solemnised on 19/2/2026 at Sinor
Village of Vadodara district. Further we
both are staying together since then and
leaving the happy married life. It is to note
that the marriage as also registered with
the competent authority and marriage
registration certificate was also issued for
the same on 27/03/2026. A copy of the
marriage certificate dated 27/03/2026 is
annexed hereto and marked as
"ANNEXURE-I" to this affidavit..
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
6. Further I submit that we have arrived at
settlement without any monetary gain, nor
we have been pressurized by the
petitioners herein for the purpose of
settlement
7. Further I submit that in view of the
settlement arrived in between the parties
and now prosecutrix and petitioner being
married to each other, considering the said
facts if the proceeding arising out of the
above mentioned FIR is quashed by the
Hon'ble High Court then in that case no
prejudice is likely to be caused to the
deponent herein.
8. In view of the above facts and
circumstances in urged this Hon'ble Court
to allow the present petition. It is also to
state that I was personal present before this
Hon'ble Court on 30/04/2026 and I had
confirmed the fact of the settlement as well
as marriage with the petitioner before the
Hon'ble Court.
9. I state that what ever is stated herein above
is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief and I
believe same to be true.".
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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
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 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
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;
(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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
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
voluntarily amicable settled between the parties and in the
present case, the prosecutrix, now a major, has appeared
before this Court and has unequivocally stated that she was in
relationship with the applicant and the applicant and herself got
married and she is presently residing with the applicant as his
legally wedded wife under one roof. The parties are stated to be
leading a stable matrimonial life. The continuance of
prosecution, in the peculiar facts of the case, would neither
advance the object of the POCSO Act nor serve any fruitful
purpose, but would instead result in disruption of the settled
family unit and unnecessary hardship to the prosecutrix herself.
Having regard to the subsequent developments, the voluntary
stand of the prosecutrix, the absence of any allegation of
compulsion or exploitation, and in order to secure the ends of
justice and prevent abuse of the process of Court and further
continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned
FIR and Special POCSO Case No. 141 of 2025 pending before
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
the Special POCSO Court, Vadodara against the petitioner
would be unnecessary harassment to the petitioner. 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 Court and hence, to secure the ends
of justice, the impugned FIR and other consequential
proceedings including Special POCSO Case No. 141 of 2025
pending before the Special POCSO Court, Vadodara are
required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers
conferred under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/8506/2026 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2026
undefined
13. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.
14. The impugned FIR No.1119002250483 of 2025
registered with Bapod Police Station, Vadodara City as well as
and other consequential proceedings including Special POCSO
Case No. 141 of 2025 pending before the Special POCSO Court,
Vadodara initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed
and set aside qua the applicant.
15. Connected application/s, if any, stand/s disposed of.
16. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(S. V. PINTO,J)
F.S. KAZI
