SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jitesh Lakshman Manghani Through … vs State Of Gujarat on 8 October, 2018

R/CR.MA/18542/2018 JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18542 of 2018
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 27689 of 2017

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE Sd/-

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to No
see the judgment ?

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the No
judgment ?

4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law No
as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any
order made thereunder ?

JITESH LAKSHMAN MANGHANI THROUGH POA HONEYBEN
LAKSHMANDAS MANGHANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance: – CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No.18542 of 2018
MR JIGNESHKUMAR P PANDAV(8297) for the PETITIONER(s) No.
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
MR SOHIL TRIVEDI for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
MR HK PATEL, APP (2) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

Appearance: – CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No.27689 of 2017
MR JAGAT V PATEL for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
MR SOHIL TRIVEDI for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
MR HK PATEL, APP (2) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE

Date : 08/10/2018

Page 1 of 3
R/CR.MA/18542/2018 JUDGMENT

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. These applications under Section 482 of the

Criminal Procedure Code are filed for quashing of FIR

being I-CR No.121 of 2017 registered with Varasiya Police

Station, Vadodara for offences under Sections 498A, 323,

406, 294B,, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and

Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, on the

ground of settlement arrived at between the parties.

2. Learned Advocate for the applicants submitted

that pending the applications, due to intervention of

respected members of society and family, mutual

understanding is arrived at between the parties and now

there remains no surviving grievance between the parties

and respondent No.2-complainant does not have any

objection is the impugned FIR is quashed and hence, the

present petition for quashing.

3. Learned Advocate Mr.Sohil Trivedi appears for

respondent No.2-complainant. He is permitted to file

appearance on behalf of respondent No.2. He submitted

that respondent No.2-Pooja @ Vani Jitesh Manghani is

present before the Court. He identifies the complainant.

The respondent No.2-complainant has filed affidavit

ratifying the compromise arrived at between the parties.

4. Considering the nature of allegations made in

Page 2 of 3
R/CR.MA/18542/2018 JUDGMENT

the FIR and the compromise arrived at between the

parties, as the dispute is now amicably settled, no

useful purpose will be served in continuing the

prosecution of the present applicants.

5. In view of the aforesaid, the applications are

allowed. FIR being I-CR No.121 of 2017 registered with

Varasiya Police Station, Vadodara is ordered to be

quashed. Rule is made absolute.

Direct service is permitted.

Sd/-

(A.Y. KOGJE, J)
SHITOLE

Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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