Gujarat High Court
Anopsinh Bahadursinh Zala & 2 vs State Of Gujarat & on 10 November, 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 1183 of 2015
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 8459 of 2015
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 1183 of 2015
ANOPSINH BAHADURSINH ZALA & 2….Applicant(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1….Respondent(s)
MR. KALRAV R PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 3
MS. NILI S SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 3
MS.DILBUR CONTRACTOR, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR DHARMESH DEVNANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 10/11/2017
1 By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants – original accused persons seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying for quashing of the proceedings of the Criminal Case No.227 of 2013 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.11, Ahmedabad arising from the First Information Report bearing IC.R. No.24 of 2013 registered with the Mahila Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 498A, 323 and 506(2) read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2 I take notice of the fact that the respondent No.2 – original first informant got married to the applicant No.1 herein on 11th May 2011. After marriage, the first informant started residing along with her husband and her inlaws i.e. the applicants Nos.2 and 3. It is alleged that soon after marriage, the applicants started harassing the first informant on trivial matters. It is further alleged that upon instigation by the parents, the husband used to beat the first informant. It also appears that about two and half months before the date of registration of the F.I.R., the husband visited the parental home of his wife and persuaded her to join him and go back to the matrimonial home. The wife, relying upon the assurance given by the husband, returned to her matrimonial home, but unfortunately for her, things did not improve. It appears that no issues are born in the wedlock.
3 On 25th March 2015, the following order was passed:
“Rule returnable on 12th June 2015. Ms. Chandarana, the learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 State of Gujarat.
It appears that the respondent No.2, although served with the notice issued by this Court, let not chosen to remain present either in person or through the advocate.
Let there be an interim order in terms of Para 11(B).
Direct service is permitted.”
4 Thereafter, on 1st November 2017, the following order was passed:
“The petitioner no.1 is directed to personally remain present before this Court on 8th November 2017. The respondent no.2 shall also remain present before this Court.
Notify the matter on top of the board on 8th November 2017.”
5 Taking into consideration the nature of the dispute, which is essentially a matrimonial, I persuaded the parties to amicably settle the matter and reconcile happily. In such circumstances, the husband was directed to personally remain present before this Court and the respondent No.2 was also asked to personally remain present before this Court. The respondent No.2 – wife is present today in the Court along with her mother. The husband is not present.
6 Mr. Kalrav Patel, the learned counsel appearing for the applicants submitted that he has been informed by the applicants Nos.2 and 3 i.e. the parents of the husband that the applicant No.1 has left the house past almost six months and his whereabouts are not known.
7 Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having considered the materials on record, I am not inclined to entertain this application for quashing of the criminal proceedings so far as the husband is concerned. It seems that the husband has deliberately left his house, not only he has estranged his lawfully wedded wife, but it appears that he has also abandoned his parents. I am inclined to quash the proceedings so far as the parents are concerned, more particularly, having regard to the nature of the allegations. I still believe that the applicant No.1 should appear before the Court concerned and put an end to the marriage itself. This is a case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. There is no point in continuing with the marriage.
8 Well, the law will take its own course in this regard. The Investigating Officer shall take all possible steps to secure the presence of the applicant – husband at any cost. If necessary, the Investigating Officer shall obtain nonbailable warrant of arrest against the husband.
9 With the above, this application is partly allowed. The proceedings of the Criminal Case No.227 of 2013 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.11, Ahmedabad arising from the First Information Report bearing IC.R. No.24 of 2013 registered with the Mahila Police Station, Ahmedabad are hereby quashed so far as the applicants Nos.2 and 3 herein are concerned. The same shall continue against the applicant No.1 – husband. The Court concerned shall take all the legal steps to secure the presence of the applicant No.1 – husband for the purpose of trial. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
10 In view of the order passed in the main matter, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.8459 of 2015 seeking vacation of interim relief would not survive and the same is disposed of.