R/CR.MA/12236/2015 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 12236 of 2015

VIRBHADRASINH RANJITSINH PARMAR 3….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT 1….Respondent(s)

Appearance:
MR. ABHISHEK A JOSHI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1-4
MR DM DEVNANI, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
MR SAMIR B GOHIL, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
HCLS COMMITTEE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

Date : 23/11/2017

ORAL ORDER

By this application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the applicants – original
accused nos.1 to 4 seek to invoke the inherent powers of this
Court, praying for quashing of the First Information Report
being I-CR No.56 of 2015 registered with the Vijaynagar Police
Station, District Sabarkantha, for the offence punishable under
Section 498A read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code
and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

It appears from the materials on record that the applicant
no.1 is the husband, the applicant no.2 is the father-in-law, the

Page 1 of 5

HC-NIC Page 1 of 5 Created On Fri Nov 24 00:03:54 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/12236/2015 ORDER

applicant no.3 is the mother-in-law and the applicant no.4 is
the sister-in-law of the respondent no.2 – original first
informant.

The respondent no.2 got married with the applicant no.1
in the year 2008.

In the FIR, which is running in about ten lines, it is stated
that there was lot of harassment at the end of the applicants
herein. She has further alleged that she had to leave the
matrimonial home on account of the incessant harassment and
demand of dowry.

Mr.Abhishek Joshi, the learned counsel appearing for the
applicants, submitted that even if the entire case of the
prosecution is believed or accepted to be true, none of the
ingredients to constitute the offence of cruelty are spelt out. It
is submitted that in fact the respondent no.2 was unable to
adjust herself at her matrimonial home and on account of very
petty matrimonial disputes she left the matrimonial home on
her own free will and volition. Mr.Joshi pointed out that
recently, i.e. in the year 2015, the respondent no.2 initiated
proceedings in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Modasa, under the provisions of the Domestic
Violence Act. He produces on record a certified copy of the
application bearing no.148 of 2015 on record for the perusal of
the court.

It appears from the averments made in this application
under the Domestic Violence Act that she had left the

Page 2 of 5

HC-NIC Page 2 of 5 Created On Fri Nov 24 00:03:54 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/12236/2015 ORDER

matrimonial home almost five years before the institution of
the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act. The
averments made in the application filed under the Domestic
Violence Act are quite at variance with the allegations levelled
in the FIR.

Lastly, it was submitted that if the respondent no.2 left
the matrimonial home some time in the year 2010, then there
was no reason for her to file a belated FIR almost after a period
of five years.

In such circumstances referred to above, the learned
counsel prays that there being merits in this application, the
same be allowed and the FIR be quashed.

On the other hand, this application has been vehemently
opposed by Mr.Samir Gohil, the learned counsel appearing for
the respondent no.2. Mr.Gohil submitted that the respondent
no.2 was being treated with cruelty as she was unable to
conceive. According to Mr.Gohil, the allegations levelled in the
FIR do disclose commission of the cognizable offence.

Mr.Devnani, the learned APP appearing for the State,
submitted that the first informant has levelled some
allegations of harassment and, therefore, the police should be
permitted to complete the investigation in accordance with
law.

On 29th June 2015, a coordinate bench passed the
following order :

Page 3 of 5

HC-NIC Page 3 of 5 Created On Fri Nov 24 00:03:54 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/12236/2015 ORDER

“Heard Mr.Abhishek A. Joshi, learned advocate for the
applicants.

Issue Notice for final disposal, returnable on 23.07.2015.

No coercive action be taken against the applicants, till

then.

Ms.Chetna M. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

waives service of notice for respondent No.1.

In addition to the normal mode of service, Direct Service
for respondent No.2 through concerned Police Station, is
also permitted.”

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
parties and having considered the materials on record, the
only question that falls for my consideration is, whether the FIR
should be quashed.

Having regard to the allegations levelled in the FIR, the
same are very vague and general. The allegations do not
inspire any confidence, more particularly, having regard to the
contradictory statement made by the respondent no.2 in the
application filed by her under the provisions of the Domestic
Violence Act. It appears that she had left the matrimonial
home almost five years before the date of the registration of
the FIR. Only with a view to exert some pressure on the
applicants, after a lapse of five years, i.e. in the year 2015, the
FIR came to be lodged. The case appears to be one of a serious
maladjustment in the marital life. Not only the husband but the

Page 4 of 5

HC-NIC Page 4 of 5 Created On Fri Nov 24 00:03:54 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/12236/2015 ORDER

other family members of the husband have also been dragged
into the prosecution.

In view of the above, this application succeeds and is
hereby allowed. The First Information Report being I-CR No.56
of 2015 registered with the Vijaynagar Police Station, District
Sabarkantha.

It is needless to clarify that this order shall not come in the way
of the respondent no.2 so far as the proceedings initiated by her
under the Domestic Violence Act is concerned. The court concerned
shall look into the application filed by the respondent no.2 under the
Domestic Violence Act on its own merits expeditiously in accordance
with law without being influenced by the fact that the FIR has been
quashed.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.)
MOIN

Page 5 of 5

HC-NIC Page 5 of 5 Created On Fri Nov 24 00:03:54 IST 2017