R/CR.MA/17502/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 17502 of 2017
THAKOR PRAVINJI MANGAJI RUPAJI….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT 1….Respondent(s)
Appearance:
MR. YOGENDRA THAKORE, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR CHAUDHARI, LD.ADVOCATE respondent No.2.
MR LB DABHI, LD.ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent No. 1
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
Date : 20/07/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. Mr.Chaudhari, learned advocate states that he has
instruction to appear on behalf of respondent No.2 – original
complainant and shall file his appearance at the earliest. He has
identified the original complainant and prosecutrix, who are
present in the Court and states that the matter is settled between
the parties.
2. With the consent of the learned advocates
appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the matter is
taken up for final hearing today.
3. Rule. Mr.L.B.Dabhi, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor waives service of Rule on behalf respondent No.1 –
State of Gujarat and Mr.Chaudhari, learned advocate waives
service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2 – original
complainant.
Page 1 of 6
HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Fri Jul 21 01:55:51 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/17502/2017 ORDER
4. By way of the present application under Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant has
prayed to quash the FIR being C.R.No.I- 50 of 2015 lodged
with Langnuj Police Station, Mahesana, for the offences
punishable under sections 363, 366, 376, 114 etc. of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 8, etc. of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act,2012 as well as all the
consequential proceedings arising from the said FIR.
5. Mr.Chaudhari, learned advocate appearing on
behalf of the original complainant has identified original
complainant and prosecutrix, who are present in the Court
and who have filed Affidavit dated 10/07/2017, which are
taken on the record. It appears from the Affidavits that
compromise has been arrived at between the parties and
original complainant and prosecutrix have no objection if the
impugned FIR is quashed.
6. Learned advocate appearing for the applicant
placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in
case of Gian Singh versus State of Punjab Anr. reported
in 2012(10)SCC 303 as well as in the case of Jitendra
Raghuvanshi Ors. V/s. Babita Raghuvanshi Anr.
reported in [2013(3)] 54 (3) G.L.R 1875 and submitted that
since the matter is settled between the parties, there is no
need to proceed further with the trial.
It is the case of applicant that now there is no
dispute between the applicant and original complainant.
7. Mr.L.B.Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
Page 2 of 6
HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Fri Jul 21 01:55:51 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/17502/2017 ORDER
has opposed this application and submitted that considering
the nature and gravity of the offence, the impugned FIR may
not be quashed.
8. I have heard learned advocate appearing on behalf
of the respective parties and perused the impugned FIR as
well as Affidavits filed by the original complainant as well as
prosecutrix dated 10/07/2017, which read as under:
“AFFIDAVIT OF THE COMPLAINANT
I, Shri Thakor Arjanji Tejaji, Aged about 45 years,
residing at Village Linch, Taluka and District-
Mehsana, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on
oath as under:-
1. I am the original complainant of C.R.No.I-50
of 2015 filed before Langnuj Police Station for the
offence punishable under section 363, 366 and
114 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, the
deponent came to know that the Investigating
Officer had preferred an application for addition of
section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and section
4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act,2012 (POCSO). I respectfully states
and submits to this Honourable Court that the
applicant and the respondents belongs to the
same community. The applicant further states
that due to the intervention of family members
and society members, interveners and having
realized consequences of the action taken, both
the parties have decided to bury the hatchet and
arrive at an amicable settlement. I state that the
dispute between the applicant and deponent has
been settled as the applicant had not committed
any offence as alleged in the compliant and my
daughter had returned back to my home and
thereafter she is married as my wish and having a
child also. I say and submits to this Honourable
Court that amicable settlement had arrived
between the parties and therefore the deponent
respectfully states and submits that the
Page 3 of 6
HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Fri Jul 21 01:55:51 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/17502/2017 ORDER
complainant – deponent (respondent no.2) have
no objection if the criminal complaint being C.R.I-
50 of 2015 filed before Langnuj Police Station is
quashed. I further say and submit that the
deponent have no grievances against the
applicant.
3. That I do not want to pursue any criminal
proceedings as registered by Langnuj Police
Station on the basis of the information submitted
to the police.
What is stated herein above is true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information
and belief and I believe the same to be true.
Solemnly affirmed at Ahmedabad on 10th
day of July,2017.”
“AFFIDAVIT OF THE PROSECUTRIX
I, Devikaben d/o Arjanji Tejaji Thakor, Aged about
20 years, original resident of Village Linch, Taluka
and District- Mehsana, do hereby solemnly affirm
and state on oath as under:-
1. I am the original complainant of C.R.No.I-50
of 2015 filed before Langnuj Police Station for the
offence punishable under section 363, 366 and
114 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, the
deponent came to know that the Investigating
Officer had preferred an application for addition of
section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and section
4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act,2012 (POCSO). I respectfully states
and submits to this Honourable Court that the
applicant and the respondents belongs to the
same community. The applicant further states
that due to the intervention of family members
and society members, interveners and having
realized consequences of the action taken, both
the parties have decided to bury the hatchet and
arrive at an amicable settlement. I state that the
dispute between the applicant and deponent has
been settled as the applicant had not committed
any offence as alleged in the compliant and I had
returned back to my home and thereafter I was
married by my family and living happily and
Page 4 of 6
HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Fri Jul 21 01:55:51 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/17502/2017 ORDER
having a child also. I say and submits to this
Honourable Court that amicable settlement had
arrived between the parties and therefore the
deponent respectfully states and submits that the
deponent have no objection if the criminal
complaint being C.R.I- 50 of 2015 filed before
Langnuj Police Station is quashed. I further say
and submit that the deponent have no grievances
against the applicant.
2. That I do not want to pursue any criminal
proceedings as registered by Langnuj Police
Station on the basis of the information submitted
to the police.
What is stated herein above is true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information
and belief and I believe the same to be true.
Solemnly affirmed at Ahmedabad on 10th
day of July,2017.”
9. It appears from the Affidavit that the applicant and
respondent No.2 – original complainant have arrived at
compromise and the original complainant has no grievance if
the impugned FIR is quashed.
10. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of
the case and considering the fact that the dispute between the
parties is now resolved, the present application is allowed.
The FIR being C.R.No.I- 50 of 2015 lodged with Langnuj
Police Station, Mahesana, for the offences punishable under
sections 363, 366, 376, 114 etc. of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 4, 8, etc. of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act,2012 as well as all the consequential
proceedings arising from the said FIR, are hereby quashed
and set aside qua the applicant only. Rule is made absolute
accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
[A.J.DESAI, J.]
Page 5 of 6
HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Fri Jul 21 01:55:51 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/17502/2017 ORDER
*dipti
Page 6 of 6
HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Fri Jul 21 01:55:51 IST 2017
