[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Siddhrajsinh Kirtisinh Chauhan vs State Of Gujarat on 22 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/7208/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/05/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT
QUASHING) NO. 7208 of 2026
=============================================
SIDDHRAJSINH KIRTISINH CHAUHAN & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR TUSHAR CHAUDHARY(5316) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR. MANAN MAHETA, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 22/05/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Harshal S. Patel submits that he
has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2 -
complainant. He is permitted to file his appearance. Registry
shall accept his vakalatnama.
2. By way of filing the present application under Section 528
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the
applicants-accused have prayed to quash and set-aside the
First Information Report No.11195010260561 of 2026
registered with the Palanpur West Police Station, District -
Banaskantha, for the offences punishable under Sections
308(2), 308(6), 308(7), 61(2), 351(2) and 351(3) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 67 and 67-A
of the Information Technology Amendment Act, 2008, as well
as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant
thereto.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/7208/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/05/2026
undefined
3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant,
who is personally present before this Court, has produced his
identity proof as well as the affidavit, which are ordered to be
taken on record. In the said affidavit, the complainant has
categorically stated that the dispute between him and the
applicants-accused has been amicably resolved and there is no
ill-will or any grievance amongst them.
4. Considering the issue involved in the present application
as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been
amicably resolved with the applicants, with the consent of the
learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the
present application is taken up for final disposal.
5. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Manan Maheta
waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.1 - State and learned advocate Mr. Harshal S.
Patel waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.2 - complainant.
6. The complainant, who is personally present before this
Court, has categorically stated that the dispute has been
amicably resolved between the parties and he has no objection
if the application is allowed and the impugned FIR is quashed
and set-aside.
7. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the
complainant - Mr. Vijaykumar Hathibhai Vaghela , read thus :
"I say and submits that soon after the filing of the aforesaid FIR and soon
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/7208/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/05/2026
undefined
after the applicant no.2 to 5 being arrested I realized that though whatever
had happened but no any money is being procured by the applicants and
since applicants and I belongs to same district and with the intervention of
elderly people and relatives and friends from both the side and also
dispute being personal in nature is now amicably settled between me and
the applicants.
I further say and submit that so on the strength of said settlement between
me and the applicants if the FIR filed by me is quashed and set aside by
this Hon'ble court then I have no objection."
8. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that to continue
further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR
would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to
abuse of process of law.
9. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties as well as considering the facts and
circumstances arising out of the present application and taking
into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, 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 & Another, reported in (2009) 1
GLH 31, Manoj Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in
(2009) 1 GLH 190, and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State
of Punjab & Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as
well as State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR
1992 SC 604, it appears that continuing further with the
criminal proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would be a
futile exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process
of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/7208/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/05/2026
undefined
and all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant
thereto are required to be quashed and set-aside in exercise of
the powers conferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
10. In the result, the application is allowed. The proceedings
of the First Information Report No.11195010260561 of 2026
registered with the Palanpur West Police Station, District -
Banaskantha, for the offences punishable under Sections
308(2), 308(6), 308(7), 61(2), 351(2) and 351(3) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 67 and 67-A
of the Information Technology Amendment Act, 2008, as well
as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant
thereto, are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside qua
the present applicants.
11. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the applicant
that the applicant is in judicial custody.
12. Therefore, considering the fact that the matter has been
settled and the complaint has been quashed, the authorities
shall release the applicant forthwith, if not required in any
other case.
13. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
YASH ARORA
