Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.
Gujarat High Court
Ajay Rajkumar Rohra vs State Of Gujarat on 1 April, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3135/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 3135 of 2024
AJAY RAJKUMAR ROHRA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT ANR.
Appearance:
MR VISHAL B MEHTA(5319) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS DIVYANGANA JHALA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 01/04/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Kunal P Chandiramani states that he
has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant
and thereby, seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama, which is
granted. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
2. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of notice of rule on
behalf of the respective respondents.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
since it is jointly stated at the Bar by learned advocates on both
the sides that the dispute between the parties has been resolved
amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith.
4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”),
the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the complaint
Page 1 of 5
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 01 20:50:44 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3135/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
being FIR CR No.11191035220842 of 2022 registered with
Naroda Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences under
Sections 498A, 323, 294(b), 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal
Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Prevention of Dowry Act as well
as all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
5. Learned advocates for the respective parties submitted that
during the pendency of proceedings, the parties have settled the
dispute amicably and pursuant to such mutual settlement, the
original complainant has also filed an Affidavit, which is taken /
placed on record. In the Affidavit, the original complainant has
categorically stated that the dispute with the applicant/s has
been resolved amicably and that he has no objection, if the
present proceedings are quashed and set aside since there is no
surviving grievance between them.
6. Having heard learned advocates on both the sides and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case,It appears
that the accused harassed the complainant mentally and
physically for dowry demands and threatened to kill her, which
led to the present complaint. However, the matter is now
amicably settled between the parties and in this regard the
complainant personally remained present before this Court and
produced a affidavit stating that she has no objection if the
complaint is quashed. So far as offence under Section 506 of IPC
is concerned, the learned Apex Court in the case of Mohammad
Wajid and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Ors., reported in 2023
LiveLaw (SC) 624: 2023 INSC 683, has held that:
Page 2 of 5
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 01 20:50:44 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3135/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
“Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 506 – Before an offence
of criminal intimidation is made out, it must be
established that the accused had an intention to cause
alarm to the complainant. (Para 27) 3 Interpretation of
Statutes- All penal statutes are to be construed strictly –
Court must see that the thing charged is an offence
within the plain meaning of the words used and must not
strain the words. (Para 19-21)”
7. In view of the above, as the principle laid down by the Apex
Court in the cases of (i) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab Anr.,
reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, (ii) Madan Mohan Abbot Vs.
State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, (iii) Nikhil
Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Anr., reported in
2009 (1) GLH 31, (iv) Manoj Sharma Vs. State Ors., reported in
2009 (1) GLH 190 and (v) Narinder Singh Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), in the opinion
of this Court, the further continuation of criminal proceedings
against the applicant/s in relation to the impugned FIR would
cause unnecessary harassment to the applicant/s. Further, the
continuance of trial pursuant to the mutual settlement arrived at
between the parties would be a futile exercise. Hence, to secure
the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to quash and set
aside the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings
initiated in pursuance thereof under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C..
8. It appears that petitioner is facing charge of Section 498A
of IPC. Therefore, as per the allegations made in the complaint,
ingredient of Section 498A is made out. In this regard, it would
be apposite to refer the decisions of the Apex Court in case of
Abhishek vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2023INSC779
Page 3 of 5
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 01 20:50:44 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3135/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
/ (Criminal Appeal No. 1457 of 2015) and in case of Preeti
Gupta and another vs. State of Jharkhand and another [(2010) 7
SCC 667], it is observed that “this Court noted that the tendency
to implicate the husband and all his immediate relations is also
not uncommon in complaints filed under Section 498A IPC. It
was observed that the Courts have to be extremely careful and
cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take
pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with
matrimonial cases, as allegations of harassment by husband’s
close relations, who were living in different cities and never
visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided,
would add an entirely different complexion and such allegations
would have to be scrutinised with great care and
circumspection”.
9. In the aforesaid backdrop, complaint is filed. It is
necessary to consider whether the power conferred by the High
Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is
warranted. It is true that the powers under Section 482 of the
Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires
great caution in its exercise. The Court must be careful to see
that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound
principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a
legitimate prosecution. The High Court being the highest court of
a State should normally refrain from giving a prima facie
decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and
hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and
produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether
factual or legal, are of magnitude and cannot be seen in their
Page 4 of 5
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 01 20:50:44 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/3135/2024 ORDER DATED: 01/04/2024
undefined
true perspective without sufficient material. Of course, no hard-
and-fast rule can be laid down in regard to cases in which the
High Court will exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction of
quashing the proceeding at any stage as the Hon’ble Supreme
Court has decided in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation
vs. Ravi Shankar Srivastava, IAS Anr., reported in AIR 2006
SC 2872.
10. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned
complaint being CR No.11191035220842 of 2022 registered with
Naroda Police Station, Ahmedabad as well as all consequential
proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed
and set aside qua the applicant/s herein. Rule is made absolute.
Direct service is permitted. If the applicant/s is/are in jail, the
jail authority concerned is directed to release the applicant/s
forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ALI
Page 5 of 5
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 01 20:50:44 IST 2024
