Gujarat High Court
Krunal Subhashchandra Shah ... vs State Of Gujarat on 26 March, 2018
Author: A.J.Desai
Bench: A.J.Desai
R/CR.MA/30947/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 30947 of 2017
=============================================
KRUNAL SUBHASHCHANDRA SHAH THRO'SUBHASHCHANDRA
NAGINDAS SHAH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=============================================
Appearance:
MR PARTHIV B SHAH(2678) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
Date : 26/03/2018
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. Learned advocate Mr. Darshan Dave is permitted to file his appearance for the respondent No.2 - complainant forthwith.
2. Considering the issue involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicant and respondent No.2 has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith.
3. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR bearing C.R.No.II-53 of 2012 registered with Godhra Town 'A' Division Police Station for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 500, 501, 509 and 114 etc. of the IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicant.
Page 1 of 3R/CR.MA/30947/2017 ORDER
4. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application. At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the issue and therefore, any further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR as well as any further proceedings arising therefrom would create hardship to the applicant. It is submitted that respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit in these proceedings and has declared that the dispute between the applicant and respondent No.2 is resolved due to intervention of trusted persons of the society. It is further submitted that in view of the fact that the dispute is resolved, the trial would be futile and any further continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. It is therefore submitted that this Court may exercise its inherent powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code and allow the application as prayed for.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the present application and submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence, the complaint in question may not be quashed and the present application may be rejected.
6. Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has reiterated the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant. The learned advocate for respondent No.2 also relied upon the affidavit filed by respondent No.2 - Rajeshkumar Chandulal Shah dated 20.3.2017. Respondent No.2 is present in person before the Court and is identified by learned advocate for respondent No.2. On inquiry made by the Court, respondent No.2 has declared before this Court that the dispute between the applicant and respondent No.2 is resolved and therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. It is therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed.
7. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the Page 2 of 3 R/CR.MA/30947/2017 ORDER respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application as well as taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicant would be unnecessary harassment to the applicant. It appears that the trial would be futile and further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.
8. Resultantly, this application is allowed and the impugned FIR bearing C.R.No.II-53 of 2012 registered with Godhra Town 'A' Division Police Station filed against the present applicant is hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside qua the applicant.
10. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted today.
(A.J.DESAI, J.) *Kazi...
Page 3 of 3