SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Samirbhai Salimbhai Ghadiya vs State Of Gujarat on 23 August, 2018

R/CR.MA/15496/2018 JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 15496 of 2018

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 ?

SAMIRBHAI SALIMBHAI GHADIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT

Appearance:
MR AMIT K DAVE(5860) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR KT DAVE(257) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR HITENDRA RAJPUT 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 : 23/08/2018

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. RULE. Learned APP Mr.H.K.Patel waives service

of Rule on behalf of respondent No.1-State. Learned

Advocate Mr.Hitendra Rajput has instructions to appear on

behalf of respondent No.2-complainant. He is permitted

Page 1 of 3
R/CR.MA/15496/2018 JUDGMENT

to file his appearance.

2. This application under Section 482 of the

Criminal Procedure Code is filed for quashing of FIR

being I-CR No.138 of 2015 registered with Umra Police

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

504, 506(1) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, on the

ground of amicable settlement arrived at between the

parties.

3. Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted

that the dispute arises out of matrimonial matter and due

to intervention of the respected members of the society,

a mutual understanding and agreement is arrived at

between the parties.

4. Learned Advocate Mr.Hitendra Rajput for

respondent No.2-complainant submitted that respondent

No.2-Zohra Samirbhai Gaadiya is present before the Court.

Learned Advocate files affidavit on behalf of respondent

No.2, ratifying the compromise arrived at between the

parties.

5. Considering the nature of allegations made in

the FIR, contents of the compromise arrived at between

the parties and as the dispute is now amicably settled,

no useful purpose will be served in continuing the

prosecution of the present applicant.

Page 2 of 3

R/CR.MA/15496/2018 JUDGMENT

6. In view of the aforesaid, the application is

allowed. FIR being I-CR No.138 of 2015 registered with

Umra Police Station 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 © 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