Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Dashrathbhai Shnakerbhai Patel & 4 vs State Of Gujarat & on 14 July, 2017

Author: A.J.Desai

Bench: A.J.Desai

                 R/CR.MA/17204/2017                                                 ORDER



                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
                                 FIR/ORDER) NO. 17204 of 2017
         ==========================================================
                DASHRATHBHAI SHNAKERBHAI PATEL & 4....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus
                      STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR. KISHAN H DAIYA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 5
         MR MAHESH K POOJARA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         MR RAKESH PATEL, LD.ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
         Respondent(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================
          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI

                                       Date : 14/07/2017


                                        ORAL ORDER

1. Mr.Mahesh Poojara, 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, who is 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.Rakesh Patel, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule on behalf respondent No.1 - State of Gujarat and Mr.Mahesh Poojara, learned advocate Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 20 19:30:56 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/17204/2017 ORDER waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2 - original complainant.

4. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants have prayed to quash the FIR being C.R.No.I- 07 of 2014 lodged with Mahuva Police Station, Surat for the offence punishable under sections 306, 498(A), 114, etc. of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as well as all the consequential proceedings arising from the said FIR.

5. Mr.Mahesh Poojara, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original complainant has identified original complainant, who is present in the Court and who has filed Affidavit dated 05/07/2017, which is taken on the record. It appears from the Affidavit that compromise has been arrived at between the parties and original complainant has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed.

6. Learned advocate appearing for the applicants 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 applicants that now there is no dispute between the applicants and original complainant.

7. Mr.Rakesh Patel, learned Additional Public Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 20 19:30:56 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/17204/2017 ORDER Prosecutor 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 Affidavit filed by the original complainant dated 05/07/2017, which reads as under:

"I, Babubhai Becharbhai Patel (Koli) Aged: 55 years, Sex: Male Occ: Agriculturist, Residing at:
A/8, Gokul Society, Vibhag 1, Bhadkodra Village, Taluka: Ankleshwar, Dist: Bharuch, respondent no.2 ori. Complainant herein files this affidavit as under:
It is submitted that I am the ori. Complainant who has filed the FIR registered as CR No.I-07 of 2014 before Mahuva Police Station, Surat and after registration of the above referred complaint at present the dispute between us is amicably resolved between with the help of friends and relatives and community people and the complaint filed by me is because of some misunderstanding and misconception which is already been shorted out between us with the help of friend and relatives and therefore now there is no ill will or grievance remain between us and all dispute is amicably resolved between us and therefore I do not want to continue with my complaint further and therefore I earnestly urge this Hon'ble Court to terminate the proceeding as prayed by petitioner in the interest of justice.
What is stated herein above is true to best of my knowledge, information belief and I believe the same to be true.
Solemnly affirmed at Ahmedabad this 5th day of July,2017."

9. It appears from the Affidavit that the applicants and respondent No.2 - original complainant have jointly Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 20 19:30:56 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/17204/2017 ORDER arrived at compromise and the original complainant has no grievance against the applicants and the matter is amicably settled between the parties.

I have gone through the statement of the deceased recorded by Investigating Agency on 11/01/2014, in which, she has categorically stated that by mistake she has consumed poisonous medicines and she has no dispute with husband and his family members and she does not want to file any complaint. However, subsequent to her death, FIR came to be filed. In view of affidavit filed by the original complainant and material available on record, in my opinion, the application requires consideration.

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- 07 of 2014 lodged with Mahuva Police Station, Surat for the offence punishable under sections 306, 498(A), 114, etc. of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as well as all the consequential proceedings arising from the said FIR, are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants only. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

Direct service is permitted.

[A.J.DESAI, J.] *dipti Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Sun Aug 20 19:30:56 IST 2017