Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Ashokbhai Vallabhbhai Bhikadiya & 1 Other(s) v. State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(s)

Ashokbhai Vallabhbhai Bhikadiya & 1 Other(s) v. State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(s)

(High Court Of Gujarat At Ahmedabad)

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 7431 of 2022 | 20-04-2022

1. Mr. Shreyang Vayeda, learned advocate states that he has instructions to appear for the respondent no.2-original complainant and seeks permission to file Vakalatnama with the Registry. Permission is granted. Registry is directed to accept the same.

2. Heard Mr. Dhruv K. Dave, learned counsel for the applicants, Mrs. Krina Calla, learned APP for the respondent State and Mr. Shreyang Vayeda, learned counsel for respondent No.2 – original complainant.

3. Rule. Learned advocates appearing for the respective respondents waive service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

4. Considering the issue involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicants and respondent No.2 has been resolved amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

5. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ”the Code”), the applicants have prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR being C.R.No.Part-A-11210008211809 of 2021 registered with Sarthana Police Station, Dist. Surat City, for the offences punishable under Sections 387, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 40 and 42A of the Gujarat Money Lenders Act as well as other consequential proceedings arising thereto.

6. Learned counsel for the respective parties submitted that during pendency of the criminal proceedings, as referred to above, the parties have amicably settled their issue by way of mutual settlement and pursuant to understanding arrived at between them, the Respondent No.2 has accordingly filed an affidavit dated 26.03.2022, which is taken on record. The complainant has categorically stated in the affidavit that the dispute is resolved between them and he has no objections if the present proceedings are quashed and there is no surviving grievance between them.

7. Learned APP has strongly opposed this application.

8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present applications 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, [LQ/SC/2012/838 ;] ">(2012) 10 SCC 303, [LQ/SC/2012/838 ;] [LQ/SC/2012/838 ;] Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, [LQ/SC/2008/766] 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 applicants would be unnecessary harassment to the applicants. 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 are required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.

9. Resultantly, this application is allowed. The impugned FIR being C.R.No.Part-A-11210008211809 of 2021 registered with Sarthana Police Station, Dist. Surat City as well as other consequential proceedings are hereby quashed and set aside. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.

Advocate List

  • MR DHRUV K DAVE

  • MRS KRINA CALLA

Bench
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Eq Citations
  • LQ
  • LQ/GujHC/2022/5653
Head Note

A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 482 — Quashing of FIR — Dispute between parties amicably settled during pendency of criminal proceedings — Parties filed affidavits to that effect — Held, further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to impugned FIR against applicants would be unnecessary harassment to applicants — Trial would be futile and further continuance of proceedings pursuant to impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law and Court and hence, to secure ends of justice, impugned FIR and other consequential proceedings quashed — Constitution of India, Art. 21