Gujarat High Court
Chandubhai Bachubhai Vaghasiya & 4 vs State Of Gujarat & on 22 March, 2017
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/SCR.A/4292/2016 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 4292 of 2016
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of
the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of
law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
CHANDUBHAI BACHUBHAI VAGHASIYA & 4....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARAT T RAO, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 5
MR DAXAY D PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS VINITA S VINAYAK, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS. THAKORE, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 22/03/2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
Page 1 of 5
HC-NIC Page 1 of 5 Created On Thu Mar 23 01:04:29 IST 2017 R/SCR.A/4292/2016 JUDGMENT
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Thakore, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1-State of Gujarat. Mr. Daxay D. Patel, the learned advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2-original complainant and waives service of notice of rule.
2. By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners seek to invoke the inherent powers of this court, praying for quashing of the first information report being I C.R. No. 22 of 2016 lodged before the Kotada Sangani Police Station, Rajkot (Rural) of the offence punishable under sections 323, 324, 504, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sections 37(1) and 135 of the Gujarat Police Act on the ground that there has been an amicable settlement between the parties and the respondent No.2- original complainant is no longer desirous of prosecuting the first information report further. The respondent No.2-Shri Girdhar @ Bhaylu Amrabhai Khimabhai Parmar is personally present and he confirms about the settlement arrived at with the accused persons. The respondent No.2- Shri Girdhar @ Bhaylu Amrabhai Khimabhai Parmar is identified by his learned advocate Mr. Daxay D. Patel. Shri Girdhar @ Bhaylu Amrabhai Khimabhai Parmar has also filed an affidavit, inter alia, stating as under:
"I, Girdharbhai @ Bhaylubhai Parmar, S/o. Amrabhai Khimabhai Parmar, male, aged 26 years, occupation mason work, residing at village Manekwada, Taluka Kotada Sangani, District Rajkot, the respondent No.2 herein, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as Page 2 of 5 HC-NIC Page 2 of 5 Created On Thu Mar 23 01:04:29 IST 2017 R/SCR.A/4292/2016 JUDGMENT under:-
1. I say that I am permanent resident of village Manekwada, Taluka Kotada Sangani, District : Rajkot. I am earning my livelihood by doing masonry work at village Manekwada, Kotada Sangani and in nearby Industries at Shapar Veraval.
2. I say and submit that Shri Chandubhai B. Vaghasiya was M.L.A of our constituency. There was oppostion to his being continued as MLA by rival political parties. I belong to the rival political group.
3. I say and submit that I am the complainant of C.R. No.I/22/2016 of Kotada Sangani Police Station.
4. I say and submit that on account of political disputes between Patel community and Debar community prevailing in Saurashtra region as a whole, I was used in this case and therefore I had lodged the aforesaid complaint on 11.5.2016 with Kotada Sangani Police Station against Shri Chandubhai B. Vaghesiya and four other under sec. 323, 324, 504, 147, 148, 149 of I.P.C and Sec. 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Preventioni of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sec. 37(1) and 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.
5. I say and submit that by passage of time, I realised that in the above matter, I have been used by the rival political group. Though no such incident as alleged in the aforesaid complaint being C.R. No.I/22/2016 occurred, I was persuaded and lured to file the complaint. I came to know that prior to the filing of the above complaint by me, the rival political group of Shri Chandubhai B. Vaghasiya had on 18.04.2016 attacked son of Shri Chandubhai B. Vaghasiya viz. Shri Dhaval Chandubhai Vaghasiya, Shri Yatin Chandubhai Vaghasiya and Shri Amit, the nephew of Shri Chandubhai B. Vaghsiya and they were seriously injured. For which C.R. No.I/75/2016 is filed with Gondal City Police Station under Sec. 395, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506(2), 120(B) and Sec. 135 of the Gujarat Police Act on 18.04.2016. In the said complaint, as police was not taking any action, SCRA No.3034 of 2016 was filed before Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and the Hon'ble High Court had directed S.P. Gondal to oversee the investigation. I Page 3 of 5 HC-NIC Page 3 of 5 Created On Thu Mar 23 01:04:29 IST 2017 R/SCR.A/4292/2016 JUDGMENT came to know subsequently that as a counterblast, by persuading me the aforesaid complaint was got filed against Shri Chandubhai B. Vaghasiya and other so that they can be pressurized to withdraw the C.R. No.I/75/2016. I say that at the time of filing the above complaint I was not aware about the aforesaid events and developments and the extent of animosity between the political groups.
6. I say and submit that thereafter as I opposed various illegal activities of the said group, I was attacked.
It wast then that I realised that I was simply used by the rival group. Thereafter with the intervention of some elderly neutral persons, I and my family met Shri Chandubhai B. Vaghasiya and his family. We had series of meetings and all the misunderstandings were cleared. I have assured them that I do not want to pursue the complaint and want to withdraw the complaint. I also assured them that I will file necessary affidavit before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the above petition that the aforesaid complaint was filed by me on account of instigation by rival group and no such incident has occurred and that I have no objection if the aforesaid complaint is quashed and set aside by this Hon'ble Court.
7. I therefore declare on oath before this Hon'ble Court that I have no objection whatsoever if the Hon'ble Court quashes and sets aside the complaint being C.R.No.I/22/2016 of Kotada Sangani Police Station under Sec. 323, 324, 504, 147, 148, 149 of IPC and sec. 3(1)(r)
(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sec. 37 (1) and 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.
8. I say and submit that I am filing this affidavit out of my free will and on my own, without any force, fear or coercion and in complete conscious state of mind.
In view of what is stated above, I declare on oath that I have no objection to the Hon'ble Court quashing the aforesaid complaint and allowing this petition.
What is stated above is correct to the best of my knowledge and information and I believe the same to be true.
Page 4 of 5
HC-NIC Page 4 of 5 Created On Thu Mar 23 01:04:29 IST 2017
R/SCR.A/4292/2016 JUDGMENT
Solemnly affirmed at Ahmedabad on this 17th day of March, 2017."
3. Taking into consideration the nature of the dispute and the fact that the parties have now amicably decided to live peacefully, no useful purpose would be served to allow the police to continue with the investigation of the said first information report.
4. In the result, this application is allowed. The first information report being I C.R. No. 22 of 2016 lodged before the Kotada Sangani Police Station, Rajkot (Rural) is hereby ordered to be quashed. All consequential proceedings arising from the same also stand terminated. Rule is made absolute. The Registry shall accept the Vakalatnama of Mr. Daxay D. Patel, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2.
Direct service is permitted.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) Vahid Page 5 of 5 HC-NIC Page 5 of 5 Created On Thu Mar 23 01:04:29 IST 2017