IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 17758 of 2011
LILAJI PRAJAPATI 4….Applicant(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT 1….Respondent(s)
MR JIGAR G GADHAVI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 5
MR ANKIT Y BACHANI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR KALPESH T GURNANI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. RAKESH PATEL, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 21/02/2018
1. By this application, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, the applicants – original accused seek to invoke the
inherent powers of this Court praying for quashing of the First
Information Report being C.R. No. I-53 of 2011 registered with the
Amirgadh Police Station, District: Banaskantha, for the offences
punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506(2) read with Section 114
of the Indian Penal Code.
2. It appears from the materials on record that the applicant no. 1 is
Page 1 of 4
HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Wed Feb 21 23:13:43 IST 2018
the father-in-law, the applicant no. 2 is the mother-in-law, the applicant
no. 3 is the elder brother-in-law, the applicant no. 4 is the wife of the
applicant no. 3 and the applicant no. 5 is the younger brother-in-law of
the respondent no. 2 – original first informant.
3. The respondent no. 2 got married with one Rameshbhai Lilaji
Prajapati before seven years from the date of registration of the FIR. In
the wedlock two daughters were born named Prerna and Tanisha.
4. It appears that matrimonial disputes cropped up between the
husband and wife, which ultimately led to the filing of the FIR.
5. On 19.01.2012, the following order was passed:
“Issue notice returnable on 9.2.2012.
Adinterim relief in terms of paragraph 9(B) qua
Learned APP waives service on behalf of the State.
Direct service to respondent No.2 is permitted.”
6. Thereafter, on 09.05.2012, the following order was passed:-
“Heard learned advocate for the applicants.
Interim relief granted earlier to continue till final
7. On 11.09.2015, the following order was passed:-
” Learned counsel for the petitioner has
drawn my attention to the address given by the
complainant according to which, she is resident of
the Rajasthan. It has been submitted that the
complainant has tried to show the incident having
taken place at Village: Kapasiya, Taluka:
Amirgadh, which falls in Gujarat, for the purpose
of jurisdiction. However, counsel for the
Page 2 of 4
HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Wed Feb 21 23:13:43 IST 2018
respondent, Mr.Ankit Bachani, is not present in the
Court. In the interest of justice, this matter is
adjourned to 9TH October, 2015.”
8. In the last, on 17.04.2017, the following order was passed:-
“Mr. Jigar Gadhavi appearing for the petitioner
states on instruction that since the offence is
arising out of matrimonial relation which is now
settled. Therefore, to produce on record the
documents regarding settlement sometime be
granted. Hence, matter is stand over to
9. It was brought to my notice that the settlement has been arrived at
between the husband and wife and the wife is residing with her husband
as on date. I requested the learned APP to inquire through the
Investigating Officer whether there has been any reunion or not.
10. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 has not
been able to gather any information as he is not in touch with his client.
However, the Investigating Officer has been able to gather the
information that the husband and wife has reconciled and are residing
together with their two daughters.
11. In such circumstances, I see no good reason now to ask the police
to carry out the investigation.
12. In the result, this application succeeds, and is hereby allowed. The
FIR being C.R. No. I-53 of 2011 registered with the Amirgadh Police
Station, District: Banaskantha, is hereby quashed. Rule is made absolute.
Direct service is permitted.
Page 3 of 4
HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Wed Feb 21 23:13:43 IST 2018
Page 4 of 4
HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Wed Feb 21 23:13:43 IST 2018