Gujarat High Court
Vikrantbhai Chandrakantbhai Mehta vs State Of Gujarat on 20 December, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 17434 of 2015
==========================================================
VIKRANTBHAI CHANDRAKANTBHAI MEHTA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.NANDISH H THACKAR(7008) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
DR YOGESH A SHELAT(6846) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR PRAKASH G PANDYA(3041) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 20/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.1 - State.
2. By way of filing of present application, the applicant seeks for quashing and setting aside the impugned F.I.R. being C.R. No.I 105 of 2014 registered with Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 & 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "the IPC").
Page 1 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined
3. The brief facts leading to filing of this application, as stated in the application, are such that the applicant aged about 31 years is having very bright in the banking sector since last 8 years and is educated upto Bachelor in Computer Application. The applicant was initially serving with the HDFC Bank for a period of two years in Ahmedabad. Thereafter, the applicant joined with Standard Chartered Bank for a period of six years. Furthermore, Pramod Bhootra and his wife Manju Pramod Bhootra are two directors of VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd. This is a registered company duly registered with the registrar of companies since 12.3.2010. Pramod Bhootra and Manju Bhootra are dealing in the business of purchase / sale of shares and future and option. VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd. had opened the office at 1201, Matrix, Corporate Road, Prahladnagar Ahmedabad. Many customers / investor were visiting this office. Original accused no.1 and his wife were meeting the customers and were advising them to invest with their company and their investment would earn handsome profit. It is further the case of the applicant in this application are as such that Original Accused No.1-Pramod Bhootra and his wife Manju Page 2 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined Bhootra are the two directors having their share of 50% each in the said company. This company is dealing in the business of investment in the stock market. It is further the case of the applicant in this application are as such that from the Sr.No.55 of the Memorandum of Article, it is clear that original accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra was doing the business in the name of VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd.
It is further the case of the applicant in this application are as such that the applicant respectfully submits that the applicant came in contact with original accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra as he was having his Saving Bank Account with the Standard Chartered Bank, Mithakhali Branch, Ahmedabad. This Pramod Bhootra was visiting regularly to the bank and was asking the applicant to give up his job with the Standard Chartered Bank and to join his company looking to the experience of the applicant in the Banking Sector. The applicant was lured upon the promise an offer made by the original accused no.1 and had joined the company of the accused no.1 on 1.10.2012. The applicant was getting the salary from this company. Furthermore, the applicant Page 3 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined was sitting in the office along with original accused no.1- Pramod Bhootra. Many customers / investors visited the office of the company for investment. The dealing was made by original accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra and the applicant was serving as the employee in the company and was doing his job as per the instructions given by the original accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra. The customers / investors used to invest in VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd. of which original accused no.1- Pramod Bhootra and his wife were the directors. The customers/investors gave account payee cheques to the original accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra. This original accused no. 1-Pramod Bhootra would deposit the cheques in the account of the company or in his account. This original accused no.1 was returning the amount / interest per month to each customer from the account of the company or from his own account. Thus, it is clear that the investment was made in "VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd." of which accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra and his wife Manju Bhootra were the directors. It is further the case of the applicant in this application are as such that not a single cheque is credited in the account of the applicant. The applicant has not made Page 4 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined any direct dealing / financial dealing with the customer and entire transaction was made by original accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra for VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd.. The amount was credited in that account. Hence, the applicant had approached this Court for quashing the FIR lodged against him.
4. Heard Mr. Nandish H Thackar, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Prakash G. Pandya, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 - complainant and Mr. Dhawan Jayswal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) for the respondent No.1 - State.
5.1 Mr. Nandish H Thackar, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that this alleged transaction is a transaction of investment between the complainant and the VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd. and the applicant has nothing to do with it and no amount was ever been deposited in the account of the applicant. Furthermore, he has submitted that it is alleged in the F.I.R. that the applicant is a partner in the firm with accused No. 1; however, it is the company of the accused No.1 and his wife as demonstrated herein under and the Page 5 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined applicant is merely an employee. Furthermore, he has submitted that Orig. Accused No.1-Pramod Bhootra and his wife Manju Pramod Bhootra are two directors of VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd.-a registered company duly registered with the registrar of companies since 12.3.2010 and dealing in the business of purchase, sale of shares and Orig. Accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra and his wife were meeting the customers and were advising them to invest with their company. The complainant has invested amount through account payee cheques in VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd. of which original accused no.1-Pramod Bhootra and his wife were the directors and the complainant has got the return of Rs. 1,42,000/- from the company. The applicant had not even joined the company of the accused no.1 at the time of alleged transaction. Therefore, the applicant cannot be vicariously liable. Furthermore, he has submitted that the applicant is well qualified and has served in the banking sector for about 8 years. Furthermore, he has submitted that the applicant himself is a victim of accused No.1. The mother and the wife of the applicant have invested a huge amount with the accused no.1 and as on date, the applicant has to Page 6 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined recover a substantial amount from the accused. 5.2 Furthermore, he has submitted that there is a huge unexplained delay of 12 months in lodging the FIR. Furthermore, he has submitted that the complainant has also got refund for the investment made by him with original accused no.1. Thus, the intention of cheating right from the inception is missing. Furthermore, he has submitted that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the applicant. There is no breach committed by the applicant. Thus, no prima facie offence u/s. 420 of IPC is made out against the applicant.
5.3 Additionally, he has submitted that there is no entrustment or dominion of property of the complainant to the applicant and no criminal breach of trust is committed by the applicant. Nature of allegations suggest that non refund of interest a civil breach for which civil suit ought to have been filed, which is not filed till date. Furthermore, he has submitted that the complainant has resorted to the Police Machinery as a lever and as arm twisting method for recovery of outstanding amount from Page 7 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined accused no.1.
5.4 In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance upon the following judgment:
(i) 2023 (6) SCC 109 ( Relevant para - 9 to 13) Kunti and another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another,
(ii) 2015 (4) SCC 609 ( Relevant para 41 to 46) Sunil Bharti Mittal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation,
(iii) 2014 (4) SCC 282 (Para-24 and 25) G.N. Verma Vs. State of Jharkhand,
(iv) 2019 (9) SCC 148 ( Relevant para - 9 to 15) Satish Chandra Ratanlal Shah Vs. State of Gujarat,
(v) 2005 (10) SCC 261 (Relevant para-2) Hotline Teletubes and Component Ltd. & Others Vs. State of Bihar and Another.
5.4 He has submitted that in view of above-all, the Page 8 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined present application be allowed by exercising the powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana V/s Bhajan Lal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604.
6.1 Mr. Prakash G. Pandya, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 - complainant has strongly objected the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and has submitted that at the time of admission of present application, this Court has granted an ad-interim relief in terms of para 8-(B) and therefore the Investigating Officer has not investigated the complaint against the present applicant. Furthermore, he has submitted that the complainant has invested his money in the company because of the fact that the present applicant has told to the complainant that he is partner of the said company and he has also invested his personal money in the company and he has also given promise and assurance to the complainant that his money is safe and secured and handsome return will be given by company and therefore the present complainant has invested his money in the said company. Page 9 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined Furthermore, he has contended that in the last paragraph of the said complaint it is mentioned by the complainant that another individuals like present complainant namely 1.Payalben Ankitbhai Desai, 2. Pursottambhai 3. Kamlaben Gupta, 4.Ramjibhai Chauhan,Pravinchandra Rameshbhai Parmar and others are also witnesses and as per say of the complainant they all are also invested their money in the said company and some person deposited their money in the account of the present petitioner namely - Vikarantbhai Chandrakantbhai Mehta, and the Investigating Officer also recorded their statement at the relevant time and if this Court gone through the said statement of the witnesses and if accounts details of the applicant would be verified by the investigating officer then some material evidence would come on record, which can show the involvement of the present applicant in the present offence.
6.2 Furthermore, he has submitted that if the Investigating Officer investigates case against the present application and go through the record of the Registrar of Companies, Ahmedabad and also go through documents Page 10 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined of the Company thereafter it will make clear the actual role of the present applicant that whether present applicant is partner of the company or employee of the company. Without documentary evidence and without investigating the complaint, the actual role of the applicant cannot be proved therefore he has requested that the investigating officer be allowed to investigate the complaint of the present complainant in the interest of justice. Furthermore, he has contended that he himself and his wife and mother are also invested their money in the company and they were also cheated by the accused No. 1 - Pramod Bhootraand and they have yet to recover the huge amount of Rs.1 crore from the company. It is further submits that if the applicant and their family persons also cheated by the Accused No.1 Pramod Bhootra then they could also filed complaint against the accused No.1 and his wife, but such type of complaint is not filed by applicant and their family member, and therefore it cannot be believed that the applicant and their family members are also cheated by the accused No. 1 Pramod Bhootra. Furthermore, he has submitted that on the above facts and circumstances of the case it can be inferred that prima facie the present Page 11 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined applicant has cheated the complainant with the accused No.1 Pramod Bhootra. Therefore investigate officer be allow to investigate the complaint of the present complainant in the interest of justice.
7. Mr. Dhawan Jayswal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) for the respondent No.1 - State has supported the contentions raised by learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and the submitted that there is prima facie material available on record against the applicant and, therefore, the Court should not exercise the powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and therefore, he has prayed to dismiss this application. 8.1 I have considered the rival submissions presented at the bar by the respective parties. Additionally, I have taken into account the essential fact that the transaction in question has transpired between the complainant and VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Moreover, prima facie, the applicant is not directly linked to the said transaction. It is noteworthy that the applicant has not received any benefits, as no amount has been deposited into his account. It is relevant to refer the provisions of Page 12 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined Sections 406, 420 & 114 of the IPC, as under:
"Section 406 in The Indian Penal Code:
406. Punishment for criminal breach of trust.--Whoever commits criminal breach of trust shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code:-
420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.--Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 114 in The Indian Penal Code:-
114. Abettor present when offence is committed.--
Whenever any person, who is absent would be liable to be punished as an abettor, is present when the act or offence for which he would be punishable in consequence of the abetment is committed, he shall be Page 13 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined deemed to have committed such act or offence." 8.2 As per the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., it is transpires that the applicant is a partner in the firm of accused No.1. However, based on the materials available on record, it becomes apparent that the applicant is prima facie identified merely as an employee of the said company in the, with accused No.1 and his wife's company, who were managing the affairs of the company. Further, on bare perusal of the record reveals, it is revealed that accused No.1, Pramod Bhootra, and his wife, Manju Pramod Bhootra, serve as the two directors of VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd., duly registered with the registrar of companies. It is evident from the record that accused No.1, Pramod Bhootra, and his wife, Manju Pramod Bhootra, were actively meeting with customers, advising them to invest in their company. The complainant, in response, invested a substantial amount through account payee cheques in VLB Management Consultant Pvt. Ltd., where the original accused No.1 and his wife served as directors. The complainant initially received returns of Rs. 1,42,000/- from the company in relation to his Page 14 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined investment.
8.3 Furthermore, it is noteworthy that, in the chain of events, it can easily be said that the applicant should be regarded as a victim rather than a perpetrator of the crime. The applicant played no active role in the offence, serving solely as an employee of the company. Additionally, the applicant's wife and mother have also invested significant amounts with accused No.1's company, and those amounts remain unpaid according to the applicant's statement. Moreover, considering the date of the impugned F.I.R., it is evident that the incident occurred on 15.5.2012, and the F.I.R. was lodged on 22.09.2014, indicating inordinate delay of two years in lodging of F.I.R.
8.3 It is relevant at this state of refer the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chanchalpati Das versus State of West Bengal and Another reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 650, more particularly, paragraphs 15 to 20 are relevant, as under:
15. In State of A.P. Vs. Golconda Linga Swamy & Another 12 this Court had observed that the Court would be Page 15 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined justified to quash the proceedings if it finds that initiation or continuance of such proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court.
16. As regards inordinate delay in filing the complaint it has been recently observed by this Court in Hasmukhlal D. Vora & Anr. vs. State of Tamil Nadu13 that though inordinate delay in itself may not be a ground for quashing of a criminal complaint, however unexplained inordinate delay must be taken into consideration as a very crucial factor and ground for quashing a criminal complaint.
17. In the light of afore-stated legal position, if the facts of the case are appreciated, there remains no shadow of doubt that the complaint filed by the respondent-complainant after an inordinate unexplained delay of eight years was nothing but sheer misuse and abuse of the process of law to settle the personal scores with the appellants, and that continuation of such malicious prosecution would also be further abuse and misuse of process of law, more particularly when neither the allegations made in the complaint nor in the chargesheet, disclose any prima facie case against the appellants. The allegations made against the appellants are so absurd and improbable that no prudent person can ever reach to a conclusion that there is a sufficient ground for proceeding against the appellants- accused.
18. Before parting, a few observations made by this Court with regard to the misuse and abuse of the process of law Page 16 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined by filing false and frivolous proceedings in the Courts need to be reproduced. In the Court. In Dalip Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others 14 it was observed that:
"1. For many centuries Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e. "satya" (truth) and "ahimsa" (non-violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth constituted an integral part of the justice-delivery system which was in vogue in the pre- Independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post-Independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system. The materialism has overshadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that those involved in litigation do not hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts in the court proceedings."
19. In Subrata Roy Sahara vs. Union of India and Others 15 it was observed as under:
"191. The Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted with frivolous litigation. Ways and means need to be evolved to deter litigants from their compulsive obsession towards senseless and ill-considered claims."
20. We would like to add that just as bad coins drive out good coins from circulation, bad cases drive out good cases from being heard on time. Because of the proliferation of frivolous cases in the courts, the real and genuine cases Page 17 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined have to take a backseat and are not being heard for years together. The party who initiates and continues a frivolous, irresponsible and senseless litigation or who abuses the process of the court must be saddled with exemplary cost, so that others may deter to follow such course. The matter should be viewed more seriously when people who claim themselves and project themselves to be the global spiritual leaders, engage themselves into such kind of frivolous litigations and use the court proceedings as a platform to settle their personal scores or to nurture their personal ego."
8.4 In light of the above discussions as well as taking into account the above-mentioned judgment, the delay itself is required to be considered in appropriate manner in the facts and circumstances of the present case and on the ground of delay only, the complaint is required to be quashed.
8.5 In addition to the above-stated fact that when no direct involvement can be attributed to the applicant in the alleged commission of offence merely because he was an employee of the said company and, therefore, this is a fit case, where this Court should consider the case of the applicant by exercising its inherent powers under Page 18 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. with a view to prevent the abuse of process of law as asking the applicant to face the criminal proceeding would amount to an undue harassment to the applicant in the facts of the present case.
8.6 Further, it will also be fruitful to mention the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed thus -
"In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Ch.XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Art.226 or the inherent powers under sec.482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down Page 19 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under sec.156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of sec.155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations
made in the FIR or complaint and the
evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.Page 20 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under sec.156(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an Page 21 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
8.7 It is also relevant to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami and Another versus State of Uttaranchal reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1, more particularly para : 23 & 24 thereof, which read as under :
"23. This Court in a number of cases has laid down the scope and ambit of courts' powers under Sec. 482 CrPC. Every High Court has inherent power to act ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice, for the administration of which alone it exists, or to prevent abuse of the process of the court. Inherent power under Sec. 482 CrPC can be exercised:
[(i) to give effect to an order under the Code;] [(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of court, and] Page 22 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined [(iii) to otherwise secure the ends of justice.]
24. Inherent powers under Sec. 482 CrPC though wide have to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with great caution and only when such exercise is justified by the tests specifically laid down in this section itself'.
Authority of the court exists for the advancement of justice. If any abuse of the process leading to injustice is brought to the notice of the court, then the court would be justified in preventing injustice by invoking inherent powers in absence of specific provisions in the statute. Discussion of decided cases."
8.8 In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit to exercise my powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code by allowing the present application in favour of the applicant with a view to prevent the abuse of process of law, which would meet the ends of justice.
9. Resultantly, the present application is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
Page 23 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17434/2015 ORDER DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined
10. The impugned F.I.R. being C.R. No.I 105 of 2014 registered with Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 & 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby quashed and set aside qua the present applicant only. Rule is made absolute.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J) DIWAKAR SHUKLA Page 24 of 24 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 21 20:44:42 IST 2023