IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO.20821 of 2017
IKBAL KASAMBHAI SHAIKH….Applicant
STATE OF GUJARAT 2….Respondents
MR SS SAIYED, ADVOCATE for the Applicant.
MR L.B. DABHI, APP for the Respondent No.1.
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
Date : 23/08/2017
1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties. Learned advocate Mr. A. S. Timbalia states that
he has an instructions to appear for the respondent No.2 –
complainant as well as prosecutrix. He is permitted to file his
2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as
learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of
Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.
3. Considering the issue involved in the present
application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing
for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the
dispute amongst the applicant and respondent No.2 has been
resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal
4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the
Page 1 of 4
HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Thu Aug 24 03:01:43 IST 2017
Code”), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside
F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. I – 51 of 2017 registered with Vatva
Police Station, Dist. Ahmedabad for the commission of offence
punishable under Sections 376 (2) (I) of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 4 and 5 (J) (2) of the Protection of Children From Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 as well as all other consequential proceedings
arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicant.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court
through the factual matrix arising out of the present application. At
the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved
the issue and therefore, any further continuance of the proceedings
pursuant to the impugned FIR as well as any further proceedings
arising therefrom would create hardship to the applicant. It is
submitted that respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit in these
proceedings and has declared that the dispute between the
applicant and respondent No.2 is resolved due to intervention of
trusted persons of the society. It is further submitted that in view
of the fact that the dispute is resolved, the trial would be futile and
any further continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse
of process of law. It is therefore submitted that this Court may
exercise its inherent powers conferred under Section 482 of the
Code and allow the application as prayed for.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
State has opposed the present application and submitted that
considering the seriousness of the offence, the complaint in
question may not be quashed and the present application may be
7. Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has reiterated
the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant.
The learned advocate for respondent No.2 also relied upon the
Page 2 of 4
HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Thu Aug 24 03:01:43 IST 2017
affidavit filed by mother of the respondent No.2 – Sannobanu
Islumkhan Pathan dated 18.8.2017. Respondent No.2 as well as
prosecutrix are present in person before the Court and is identified
by learned advocate for respondent No.2. On inquiry made by the
Court, they have declared before this Court that the dispute
between the applicant and respondent No.2 is resolved due to
intervention of trusted persons of the society and therefore, now
the grievance stands redressed. It is therefore submitted that the
present application may be allowed.
8. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising
out of the present application as well as taking into consideration
the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of
Punjab Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan
Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582,
Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Anr.,
reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma Vs. State Ors.,
reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh Ors. Vs.
State of Punjab Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), it
appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in
relation to the impugned FIR against the applicant would be
unnecessary harassment to the applicant. It appears that the trial
would be futile and further continuance of the proceedings
pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of
law and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is
required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers
conferred under Section 482 of the Code.
9. Resultantly, this application is allowed and the
impugned F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. I – 51 of 2017 registered with
Vatva Police Station, Dist. Ahmedabad is hereby quashed and
set aside qua the applicant. Consequently, all other proceedings
Page 3 of 4
HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Thu Aug 24 03:01:43 IST 2017
arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside qua
the applicant. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute.
It is reported that the applicant is in judicial custody.
Since the complaint itself is quashed, the Jail authority is hereby
directed to release the applicant forthwith.
Direct service is permitted.
Page 4 of 4
HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Thu Aug 24 03:01:43 IST 2017