SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Alban Edwin Dsouza vs State Of Gujarat on 4 December, 2018

R/SCR.A/10517/2018 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 10517 of 2018

ALBAN EDWIN DSOUZA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
HARSHESH R KAKKAD(7813) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR RC KAKKAD(389) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2,3
for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
MR. MANAN MEHTA, APP (2) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI

Date : 04/12/2018

ORAL ORDER

1. According to the petitioners, this Court in

Criminal Misc. Application No. 1742 of 2015 on

24.11.2015 has quashed the First Information

Report being I­C.R. No. 94 of 2014 registered

with Bopal Police Station, Ahmedabad (Rural) for

the offences punishable under Sections 323, 376,

377, 498A, 506 r/w. Section 114 of the Indian

Penal Code and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry

Prohibition Act.

2. Learned advocate Mr. Kakkad appearing for the

Page 1 of 3
R/SCR.A/10517/2018 ORDER

petitioners submits that the notice came to be

issued by this Court on 02.02.2015 and the

respondent no.2 initiated the proceedings under

the provisions of Protection of Women from

Domestic Violence Act, 2005 by way of Criminal

Misc. Application No. 227 of 2014 with the Court

of learned 7th Additional Civil Judge and Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Mirzapur, Ahmedabad, on

13.02.2015. He has urged that identical

allegations were incorporated in the F.I.R. which

was quashed earlier by this Court. In this fresh

proceeding initiated, the petitioners are served

with the summons recently in the month of

September, 2018.

3. Issue Notice to the respondents as well as

notice for exploring the possibility of

compromise, returnable on 20th December, 2018.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives

service of notice on behalf of the respondent

no.1 – State. Over and above regular mode of

service, additional service through speed post at

Page 2 of 3
R/SCR.A/10517/2018 ORDER

the cost of the petitioners is permitted.

4. The petitioners may request for adjournment

before the Court concerned, if such an

application is moved, the Court concerned shall

consider it.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Kakkad on a query raised

by this Hon’ble Court states that, husband is

residing at U.K. He has ensured to make a genuine

effort to settle the dispute, if respondent no.2

is inclined to do so.

(MS SONIA GOKANI, J)
pradhyuman

Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation