Gujarat High Court
Ramphal Birsingh Poonia vs State Of Gujarat on 1 August, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17115/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 17115 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
RAMPHAL BIRSINGH POONIA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARDIK A DAVE(3764) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR RONAK RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 01/08/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Hardik Dave for the applicant learned APP Mr. Ronak Raval for the respondent - State. Though served, none appears for respondent no.2 - original complainant.
Page 1 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:44:40 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17115/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2023 undefined
2. By way of present petition filed under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks following reliefs :-
"(A) Be pleased to allow this Criminal Misc. Application by quashing the complaint at Annexure A being CR No.I-6 of 2014 registered before Olpad Police Station by respondent no.2 in the interest of justice. (B) Pending admission, hearing and till final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may kindly stay further proceedings of complaint being CR No.I-6 of 2014 at Annexure A and be further pleased to direct respondent authorities not to apply any coercive method against the petitioner."
3. Learned advocate Mr.Dave for the applicant referring to the order dated 09.09.2015 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.12421 of 2015 submits that on settlement with original complainant, FIR qua other accused who are branded as main accused in the FIR has been quashed. He would submit that present petitioner who is arraigned as accused is advocate and notary public. It is alleged that in capacity of advocate and notary public, he has extended help to the main accused in forging documents as well as in committing offence of criminal breach of trust or forgery. However, in view of section 13 of the Notary Act, the petitioner being notary public is protected. No cognizance can be taken against notary public in absence of complaint defined in section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C. Such complaint is to be filed by the authorized officer of Central or State Government. In other words, it is stated that first informant has no right to file complaint against notary public and if it is filed it Page 2 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:44:40 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17115/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2023 undefined is in teeth of section 13 of the Notary Act. Upon such submissions, learned advocate for the applicant submits to allow this petition.
4. On the other hand, learned APP submits that the petitioner has filed application before the learned Trial Court seeking relief to delete his name or drop proceedings. He would submit that whether FIR is in teeth of section 13 of the Notaries Act or not, can be considered by the learned Trial Court. He would further submits that section 13 of Notaries Act put bar on taking cognizance and not on registering FIR. Thus bar under section 13 of the Notaries Act cannot help the petitioner at this juncture. Upon such submissions, it is submitted to dismiss the petition.
5. Regard had being to rival submissions of both the sides, at the outset refer the order dated 09.09.2015 passed by the Co- ordinate Bench in Criminal Misc. Application No.12421 of 2015. Para 2 to para 5 of the said order reads as under :-
"2.By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants original accused persons seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court for quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No.841 of 2014 pending in the Court of the learned Additional Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Surat, arising from the F.I.R. being C.R.No.I06 of 2014 filed before the Olpad Police Station, Surat for the offence punishable under Sections406, 420, 466, 467, 471, 120(B) r/w.114 of the I.P.C.
3. The quashing of the complaint is prayed for on the ground that the parties have amicably settled the dispute. The respondent no.2 viz.Jagubhai Chhanabhai Parmar has filed an affidavit interalia stating as under:
I, Jagubhai Chhanabhai Parmar, Male, Aged 62 Page 3 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:44:40 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17115/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2023 undefined years, Agriculturist, Residing at B/26/7, Bhavi Dharshan Sankool, Magdalla, Surat, respondent no.2 herein, do hereby solemnly affirm on oath and state as under:
1. I state that I am respondent No.2, original complainant, in the captioned application. I lodged a first information report against the applicants and one another at Olpad Police Station, which came to be registered as C.R. No.I6/2014 on 6.1.2014, for the offences punishable under Sections406, 420, 466, 467, 471, 120B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. I state that I have been read over the captioned application and explained the same to me in Gujarati language and I am filing this affidavit in support of the said application, which is filed by the applicants for quashing of the abovereferred first information report with consent.
2. I state that, after the investigation has progressed to some extent, the applicants approached the deponent to settle the matter amicably and some leading person known to both sides of the society also intervened and got the matter settled amicably between the applicants and the deponent. I state that, to effect the settlement, applicant No.2 re-
conveyed the land in question being revenue survey No.126, admeasuring 28,227 sq.meters of village Ovhla, Taluka Olpad, District Surat, in favour of the nominees of the deponent by a registered sale deed and the forged power of attorney used for executing sale deed in favour fo applicant No.2 is also returned to the deponent by the applicants. I state that I am satisfied with the said settlement and, since the dispute is not concerning the public law, the first information report in question may be quashed by this Hon'ble Court. I state that, since the matter is amicably settled between the parties, I am not willing and inclined to prosecute my complaint any further and I am not interested in prosecuting the said first information report against the applicants any further in the court of law. I, therefore, state that I have no objection and I consent to quashing of the said complaint as prayed for by the applicants.
Page 4 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:44:40 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17115/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2023 undefined
3. I state that, at present, I am suffering from paralysis and I am unable to travel and, therefore, my travelling to Ahmedabad is very difficult. I, therefore, pray to this Hon'ble Court to dispense with my presence before this hon'ble Court at the time of hearing of the application and this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the abovereferred first information report lodged by me, as stated above, against the applicants by consent. Whatever stated hereinabove is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I believe the same to be true and correct.
Solemnly affirmed on oath on this 7 th day of September, 2015 at Surat."
The first informant is not present in the Court as he is suffering from paralysis. He has given consent for quashing of criminal proceedings and confirms about the settlement arrived at with the accused persons.
4. Taking into consideration the nature of the dispute and the fact that the parties have amicably settled the dispute, no useful purpose would now be served to proceed further with the criminal case. The affidavit filed by the original first informant is ordered to be taken on record.
5. In the result, this application is allowed. The further proceedings of Criminal Case No.841 of 2014 pending in the Court of the learned Additional Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Surat, arising from the F.I.R. being C.R.No.I06 of 2014 filed before the Olpad Police Station, Surat, are hereby ordered to be quashed qua the applicants herein. All consequential proceedings pursuant thereto shall stand terminated."
6. Upon above count when original complainant has settled the dispute with the main accused and settlement has resulted into quashing the FIR, such FIR could not be allowed to continue against the present petitioner who is advocate and notary public. Perusal of section 13 of the Notary Act also indicates that the Page 5 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:44:40 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17115/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2023 undefined Court cannot take cognizance against notary public save upon complaint in writing made by an officer authorized by the Central Government or a State Government by general or special order in this behalf. When provisio of section 13 speaks for complaint; it is complaint defined under section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C. In the present case, admittedly, the complainant is not authorized officer of the Central or State Government. Thus learned Court below was not in position to take cognizance of the FIR. In reason thereof, even on the count of breach of section 13 is concerned, the petition is required to be allowed.
7. For the foregoing reasons, the petition is allowed. FIR being C.R.No.I-6 of 2014 registered with Olpad Police Station and all consequential proceedings arising out of said FIR are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) SATISH Page 6 of 6 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 23:44:40 IST 2023