Haresh Najabhai Sankhat Koli vs State Of Gujarat & on 31 August, 2017

R/CR.MA/21529/2017 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO.21529 of 2017

HARESH NAJABHAI SANKHAT KOLI….Applicant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT 1….Respondents

Appearance :
MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant.
MR L.B. DABHI, APP for the Respondent No.1.

CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI

Date : 31/08/2017
ORAL ORDER

1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties. Learned advocate Mr. Yash Patel states that he
has an instructions to appear for the respondent No.2 –
complainant as well as parents of the respondent No.2 as
respondent No.2 being minor. He is permitted to file his
appearance forthwith.

2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as
learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of
Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

3. 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 applicant and respondent No.2 has been
resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal
forthwith.

4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the

Page 1 of 4

HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Fri Sep 01 00:08:02 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/21529/2017 ORDER

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the
Code”), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside
F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. I – 15 of 2017 registered with Una
Police Station, Dist. Gir Somnath for the commission of offence
punishable under Sections 376, 506 (2) of the Indian Penal Code
read with Sections 3 (A), 4, 5 (l) and 6 of the POCSO Act as well as
quash all other consequential proceedings arising out of the
aforesaid FIR qua the applicant.

5. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court
through the factual matrix arising out of the present application. At
the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved
the issue and therefore, any further continuance of the proceedings
pursuant to the impugned FIR as well as any further proceedings
arising therefrom would create hardship to the applicant. It is
submitted that parents of the respondent No.2 have filed affidavits
in these proceedings and have declared that the dispute between
the applicant and respondent No.2 is resolved as the applicant and
respondent No.2 are residing together and the respondent No.2
has delivered a child. It is further submitted that in view of the fact
that the dispute is resolved, the trial would be futile and any
further continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse of
process of law. It is therefore submitted that this Court may
exercise its inherent powers conferred under Section 482 of the
Code and allow the application as prayed for.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
State has opposed the present application and submitted that
considering the seriousness of the offence, the complaint in
question may not be quashed and the present application may be
rejected.

7. Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has reiterated

Page 2 of 4

HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Fri Sep 01 00:08:02 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/21529/2017 ORDER

the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant.
The learned advocate for respondent No.2 also relied upon the
affidavits dated 31.8.2017 filed by Monghiben @ Lilaben Rajabhai
Parmar and Rajabhai Nathubhai Parmar i.e. parents of the
prosecutrix. Respondent No.2 along with her parents are present in
person before the Court and are identified by learned advocate for
respondent No.2. On inquiry made by the Court, they have declared
before this Court that the dispute between the applicant and
respondent No.2 is resolved as the applicant and respondent No.2
are residing together and the respondent No.2 has delivered a
child. Therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. It is
therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed.

8. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising
out of the present application 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, 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 further continuation of criminal proceedings in
relation to the impugned FIR against the applicant would be
unnecessary harassment to the applicant. 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 hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is
required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers
conferred under Section 482 of the Code.

9. Resultantly, this application is allowed and the

Page 3 of 4

HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Fri Sep 01 00:08:02 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/21529/2017 ORDER

impugned F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. I – 15 of 2017 registered with
Una Police Station, Dist. Gir Somnath is hereby quashed and
set aside qua the applicant. Consequently, all other proceedings
arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside qua
the applicant. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute.

Direct service is permitted.

(A.J.DESAI, J.)

Savariya

Page 4 of 4

HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Fri Sep 01 00:08:02 IST 2017

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *