SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jayrajbhai Vinubhai Zala & vs State Of Gujarat & on 13 October, 2017

R/CR.MA/25806/2017 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO.25806 of 2017

JAYRAJBHAI VINUBHAI ZALA 1….Applicants
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT 1….Respondents

Appearance :
MR VAIBHAV N SHETH, ADVOCATE for the Applicants.
MR L.B. DABHI, APP for the Respondent No.1.

CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI

Date : 13/10/2017
ORAL ORDER

1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties. Mr. Pratik Y. Jasani states that he has
instructions to appear for the original complainant – respondent
No.2 as well as the prosecutrix. He is directed to file his
appearance forthwith. The complainant states that the matter is
settled between the parties.

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 applicants and respondent No.2 has been
resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal
forthwith.

4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the

Page 1 of 4

HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sat Oct 14 01:24:16 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/25806/2017 ORDER

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the
Code”), the applicants have prayed for quashing and setting aside
F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. I – 106 of 2017 registered with
Sayajiganj Police Station, Dist. Vadodara for the commission of
offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 114 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 8 and 11 (1) of the POCSO Act
as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the
aforesaid FIR qua the applicants.

5. Learned advocate for the applicants 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
applicants. It is submitted that respondent No.2 as well as mother
of the prosecutrix has filed affidavits in these proceedings and have
declared that the dispute between the applicants 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
rejected.

7. Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has reiterated

Page 2 of 4

HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sat Oct 14 01:24:16 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/25806/2017 ORDER

the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicants.
The learned advocate for respondent No.2 also relied upon the
affidavit filed by respondent No.2 – Rameshbhai Shalambhai Zala
dated 13.10.2017 as well as the affidavit of Ilaben Rameshbhai
Zala, mother of the prosecutrix dated 13.10.2017. Respondent No.2
along with his wife and prosecutrix are present in person before
the Court and are identified by learned advocate for respondent
No.2. On inquiry made by the Court, respondent No.2 has declared
before this Court that the dispute between the applicants 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 applicants would be
unnecessary harassment to the applicants. I have also considered
the latest decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and
others v. State of Gujarat, Criminal Appeal No.1723 of 2017
dated 4.10.2017 and the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the said decision, particularly paragraph 15.
Considering the nature of disputes between the parties which are
all private in nature, I am of the opinion that the matter requires

Page 3 of 4

HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sat Oct 14 01:24:16 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/25806/2017 ORDER

consideration. I have also perused the papers of investigation,
particularly the statement of the prosecutrix. The complainant as
well as prosecutrix are present in the Court. It appears that the
prosecutrix is in love with the applicant No.1 for the last two and
half years and the prosecutrix had resided with the applicant No.1
for a period of twenty days at Bangalore. It is stated by learned
advocate appearing for the applicants that the applicant No.1
intends to marry the prosecutrix on her attaining the age of
majority. 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 – 106 of 2017 registered
with Sayajiganj Police Station, Dist. Vadodara is hereby
quashed and set aside qua the applicants. Consequently, all other
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid F.I.R. are also quashed and
set aside qua the applicants. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute.

It is reported by learned advocate appearing for the
applicants that applicant No.2 has been released on bail, however,
the order is not yet received.

Since the complaint in question itself is quashed and
set aside, the Jail Authority shall release the applicant No.1
forthwith.

Direct service is permitted.

(A.J.DESAI, J.)

Savariya

Page 4 of 4

HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Sat Oct 14 01:24:16 IST 2017

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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