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
Mayurbhai Narendrabhai Prajapati vs State Of Gujarat on 3 April, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/4189/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 4189 of 2024
MAYURBHAI NARENDRABHAI PRAJAPATI ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT ANR.
Appearance:
DAKWALA JAY S(13856) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS DIVYANGANA JHALA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 03/04/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Nilay Chheda states that he has
instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and
thereby, seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama, which is
granted. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
2. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
3. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of notice of rule on
behalf of the respective respondents.
4. 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.
5. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of
Page 1 of 5
Downloaded on : Thu Apr 04 20:55:01 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/4189/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2024
undefined
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”),
the applicants have prayed to quash and set aside the complaint
being FIR C.R. No.11191007230422 of 2023 registered with
Bapunagar Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences under
Sections 498(A), 294(B) 323 and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as well as all
the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
6. 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
on record. In the Affidavit, the original complainant has
categorically stated that the dispute with the applicant 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.
7. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties
and considered the material available on record, it appears that
after some time of marriage, the complainant was being mentally
and physically harassed by her in-laws, and the husband of the
complainant was habitually consuming liquor. The complainant
complained about this to her in-laws, but they did not take it
seriously and dismissed it as a minor issue. It is also alleged in
the FIR that the in-laws of the complainant used to torture her
for demanding dowry, which led to the present complaint.
However, the matter is amicably settled between the parties and
in this regard, the complainant has filed an affidavit stating that
Page 2 of 5
Downloaded on : Thu Apr 04 20:55:01 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/4189/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2024
undefined
she has no objection if the compliant is quashed. In view of the
above, no fruitful purpose would be served to proceed with the
matter.
8. It also pears from the record 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 uncommon in complaints filed
under Section 498A IPC. It was observed that the Courts have to
be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these
complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration
while dealing with matrimonial cases, as allegations of
harassment by husband’s close relations, who were living in
different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where
the complainant resided, would add an entirely different
complexion and such allegations would have to be scrutinised
with great care and circumspection”.
9. 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)
Page 3 of 5
Downloaded on : Thu Apr 04 20:55:01 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/4189/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2024
undefined
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..
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
Page 4 of 5
Downloaded on : Thu Apr 04 20:55:01 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/4189/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/04/2024
undefined
quashing the proceeding at any stage as the Hon’ble Supreme
Court has decided in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation
vs. Ravi Shankar Srivastava, IAS Anr., reported in AIR 2006
SC 2872.
11. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned
complaint being C.R. No.11191007230422 of 2023 registered
with Bapunagar 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. 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 5 of 5
Downloaded on : Thu Apr 04 20:55:01 IST 2024
