SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Special Criminal … vs State Of Gujarat & on 5 August, 2014

Gujarat High Court Special Criminal … vs State Of Gujarat & on 5 August, 2014

R/SCR.A/2606/2014 JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION(QUASHING)NO.2606 of 2014   For Approval and Signature:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA  Sd/­ ===================================================== Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be  1 NO allowed to see the judgment ?

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO Whether   their   Lordships   wish   to   see   the  3 NO fair copy of the judgment ?

Whether this case involves a substantial  question of law as to the interpretation  4 NO of the constitution of India, 1950 or any  order made thereunder ?

Whether   it   is   to   be   circulated   to   the  5 NO civil judge ?

===================================================== JIGNESHKUMAR DASHRATHLAL PATEL  &  3….Applicant(s) Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT  &  1….Respondent(s) =================================================== Appearance:

MR ASHOK A PUROHIT, ADVOCATE for Applicant Nos.1­4 MR LR POOJARI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR DB PATEL, ADVOCATE, for the Respondent(s) No. 2 =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA  Date : 05/08/2014

    ORAL JUDGMENT

(1) Heard   learned   counsel   for   the   respective  parties.

(2) RULE.  Learned   counsel   appearing   for   the  respective respondents waive service. 

(3) Considering   the   issue   involved   in   the  present   petition   and   with   consent   of   the 

Page 1 of 5

R/SCR.A/2606/2014 JUDGMENT

learned advocates appearing on behalf of the  respective   parties   as   well   as   considering  the   fact   that   the   dispute   amongst   the  parties   has   been   resolved   amicably,   this  petition   is   taken   up   for   final   disposal  forthwith. 

(4) By way of the present petition under Section  482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  (the   Code)   the   petitioners­original   accused  have   prayed   for   quashing   of   F.I.R.   being  C.R.   No.II­4   of   2014   registered   at   Vaghai  Police Station, Dist. Dang for the offences  under Sections 498A, 323, 114 of the Indian  Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC) and Sections 3(i) (xv)   of   the   Scheduled   Caste   and   Scheduled  Tribe  (Prevention of Atrocities)  Act, 1989,  charge­sheet filed pursuant to the aforesaid  F.I.R.   as   well   as   all   consequential  proceedings   arising   out   of   the   aforesaid  F.I.R.  

(5) This   Court   vide   order   dated   21.07.2014  issued notice.

(6) Learned   advocates   for   the   petitioners     as  well as respondent No.2 have declared before  this Court that respondent No.2 had married  petitioner   No.1   and   because   of   the   dispute  and misunderstanding they have separated. It 

Page 2 of 5

R/SCR.A/2606/2014 JUDGMENT

was further pointed out that after filing of  the   aforesaid   F.I.R.   the   parties   have  amicably   resolved   the   dispute,   which   arose  because of some matrimonial dispute.

(7) Learned   advocate   for   the   respondent   No.2,  has reiterated the contentions raised by the  learned   advocate   for   the   petitioners­ original   accused   and   affidavit   dated  30.07.2014   (in   vernacular   language)   of  respondent   No.2   to   that   effect   is   also  tendered,   which   is   taken   on   record.   It   is  further   submitted   that  respondent  No.2   is  personally   present   in   the   court,   who   is  identified   by   the   learned   advocate   for  respondent   No.2.   To   substantiate   her  identity,   a   copy   of   Aadhar   Card   of  respondent   No.2   is   tendered,   which   is   also  taken on record.

On   enquiry  by   this   Court   with   help   of  Ms.Hansa   Punani,   learned   Additional   Public  Prosecutor,  respondent  No.2­first informant,  declared   that   the   parties   have   amicably  settled the dispute, which is of matrimonial  nature,   and   an   affidavit   to   that   effect   is  also   placed   on   record   of   the   present  proceedings   and,   therefore,   the   first  informant   states   that   she   does   not   want   to 

Page 3 of 5

R/SCR.A/2606/2014 JUDGMENT

proceed   further   with   the   matter   in  connection with the impugned F.I.R.

(8) Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor  for the  respondent­State,   candidly   states   that   as  the   dispute   between   the   parties   was  predominantly   of   matrimonial   nature,   which  the parties have amicably resolved and even  on instructions of the Investigation Officer  learned APP states that the dispute between  the   parties   have   amicably   resolved,   this  Court may pass appropriate orders.

No other and further contentions are raised  by   the   learned   advocates   appearing   for   the  respective parties.

(9) Having heard the learned advocates appearing  on   behalf   of   the   respective   parties,  considering   the   facts   and   circumstances  arising out of the present petition as well  as   considering   the   ratio   of   the   decisions  rendered   in   the   cases   of  Gian   Singh   Vs.  State   of   Punjab   &   Anr.,  (2012)   10   S.C.C.  303,  Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab,  2008(4)   S.C.C.   582,  Nikhil   Merchant   V/s.  Central   Bureau   of   Investigation   &   Anr.,  2009(1)   GLH   31,  Manoj   Sharma   Vs.   State   &  Ors.,   2009(1)   GLH   190   as   well   as  Narinder 

Page 4 of 5

R/SCR.A/2606/2014 JUDGMENT

Singh   &   Ors.   Vs.   State   of   Panjab   &   Anr.,  2014(2)   Crimes   67   (SC),   it   appears   that  further continuation of criminal proceedings  in   relation   to   the   impugned   F.I.R.   against  the   petitioners   would   be   unnecessary  harassment   to   the   petitioners   and   would  amount to abuse of process of law and court  and   hence,   to   secure   the   ends   of   justice,  the   impugned   F.I.R.   is   required   to   be  quashed   in   exercise   of   power   under   Section  482 of the Code.

(10) For   the   reasons   stated   hereinabove,   the  present petition is allowed. Impugned F.I.R.  being   C.R.  No.II­4   of   2014   registered   at  Vaghai   Police   Station,   Dist.   Dang,   charge­ sheet filed pursuant to the aforesaid F.I.R.  as   well   as   all   consequential   proceedings  arising   out   of   the   aforesaid   F.I.R.   are  hereby quashed and set aside.

(11) Rule   is   made   absolute   to   the   aforesaid  extent.  Direct service permitted. 

 Sd/­      

 [R.M.CHHAYA, J ]

*** 

Bhavesh [pps]* 

Page 5 of 5

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