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
Arjanbhai Mavjibhai Rathod vs State Of Gujarat on 21 February, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1023/2023 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 1023 of 2023
ARJANBHAI MAVJIBHAI RATHOD ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT ANR.
Appearance:
MR JASPALSINH R JADEJA(11226) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
MR BJ TRIVEDI(921) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
CM SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 21/02/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. B. J. Trivedi states that she has
instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and
thereby, seeks permission to file her 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.”),
Page 1 of 6
Downloaded on : Fri Feb 23 21:27:43 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1023/2023 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2024
undefined
the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the complaint
being FIR being C.R. No.11191048221239 of 2022 registered
with Sarkhej Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences under
Sections 498A, 406, 420 and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 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 have
categorically stated that the dispute with the applicants 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 for the respective parties
and considered the material available on record, in the
complaint, it is alleged that petitioners have mentally and
physically harassed the complainant. It appears that petitioners
are 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 / (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
Page 2 of 6
Downloaded on : Fri Feb 23 21:27:43 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1023/2023 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2024
undefined
7. In view of 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. Insofar as offence under Section 420 of the IPC is
Page 3 of 6
Downloaded on : Fri Feb 23 21:27:43 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1023/2023 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2024
undefined
concerned, it is appropriate to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the case of Rekha Jain vs. The State of Karnataka
Anr. reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 468, wherein the Hon’ble
Supreme Court held that, to make out a case against a person
for the offence under Section 420 of IPC, there must be a
dishonest inducement to deceive a person to deliver any property
to any other person. Further, in the case of Sarabjit Kaur vs.
State of Punjab Anr. reported in (2023)5 SCC 360 has held in
paragraph No.13 as follows:
“13. A breach of contract does not give rise to criminal
prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest
intention is shown right at the beginning of the
transaction. Merely on the allegation of failure to keep up
promise will not be enough to initiate criminal
proceedings. From the facts available on record, it is
evident that the respondent No.2 had improved his case
ever since the first complaint was filed in which there
were no allegations against the appellant rather it was
only against the property dealers which was in
subsequent complaints that the name of the appellant
was mentioned. On the first complaint, the only request
was for return of the amount paid by the respondent
No.2. When the offence was made out on the basis of the
first complaint, the second complaint was filed with
improved version making allegations against the appellant
as well which was not there in the earlier complaint. The
entire idea seems to be to convert a civil dispute into
criminal and put pressure on the appellant for return of
the amount allegedly paid. The criminal Courts are not
meant to be used for settling scores or pressurise parties
to settle civil disputes. Wherever ingredients of criminal
offences are made out, criminal courts have to take
cognizance. The complaint in question on the basis of
which F.I.R. was registered was filed nearly three years
after the last date fixed for registration of the sale deed.
Allowing the proceedings to continue would be an abuse
of process of the Court.”
Page 4 of 6
Downloaded on : Fri Feb 23 21:27:43 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1023/2023 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2024
undefined
9. 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..
10. 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
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
Page 5 of 6
Downloaded on : Fri Feb 23 21:27:43 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1023/2023 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2024
undefined
vs. Ravi Shankar Srivastava, IAS Anr., reported in AIR 2006
SC 2872 and State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and
others reported in [(1992) Supp (1) SCC 335].
11. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned
complaint being FIR being C.R. No.11191048221239 of 2022
registered with Sarkhej Police Station, Ahmedabad as well as all
consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are
hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants herein. Rule is
made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
12. If the applicants are in jail, the jail authority concerned is
directed to release the applicants forthwith, if not required in
connection with any other case.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ALI
Page 6 of 6
Downloaded on : Fri Feb 23 21:27:43 IST 2024
