Gujarat High Court
Kishorbhai Rameshbhai Thakkar vs State Of Gujarat on 28 September, 2020
Author: A. P. Thaker
Bench: A. P. Thaker
R/CR.MA/5391/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5391 of 2020
=================================================
KISHORBHAI RAMESHBHAI THAKKAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=================================================
Appearance:
MR. RAHUL R DHOLAKIA(6765) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR HARDIK A DAVE(3764) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MAITHILI MEHTA APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER
Date : 28/09/2020
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr.Dholakia, learned advocate for the applicants, Ms.Mehta, learned Additional Public Proecutor for respondent No.1 - State and Mr.Dave, learned advocate for respondent No.2 - complainant through Video Conferencing.
2. RULE. The respondents waive service.
3. Considering the short dispute involved as also the settlement between the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.
4. An F.I.R. being C.R.No.I - 23/2020 came to be registered with Anandnagar Police Station, District:
Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 323, 504, 506(2), 120(B) etc. of the Indian Penal Code, Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 28 22:07:16 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/5391/2020 ORDER Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of the Atrocities Act.
5. The original complainant is present through video conferencing with Mr.Dave, learned advocate. On inquiry from him, he i.e. respondent No.2 has submitted that he has tenderred affidavit acknowledging settlement between the complainant and the applicants. It has been affirmed by the respondent No.2 - complainant that the complainant has no grievance against the applicants.
6. The original complainant has stated in paras-3 and 4 of the affidavit as follows:-
3. I state that due to persuasion of the trusted persons of the family, friends and society, I have amicably settled the matter with the applicants and/or others the dispute between us no longer survives and I very rightly and legally do not want to pursue the criminal proceedings initiated by me against the applicants and/or others. I state that the impugned FIR was filed by me under the fit of rage and now since the dispute between us no longer survives, I state that I have no objection if the impugned FIR in question as well as the proceedings prior and pursuant thereto is quashed and set aside.
4. I say and submit that since the dispute in question is private in nature and does not affect the State Government in any manner whatsoever. I state that the dispute is amicably settled between the applicants and/or others and I, it would be just and proper that the FIR bearin I - C.R.No.23 of 2020 registered with Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad and all proceedings prior and pursuant thereto be quashed and set aside in the interest of justice.
7. The learned advocates for the applicants and respondent No.2 thus, would submit that looking to the nature of allegations against the applicants, even otherwise, Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 28 22:07:16 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/5391/2020 ORDER no case against the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 323, 504, 506(2), 120(B) etc. of the Indian Penal Code, Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of the Atrocities Act is made out. It was, therefore, urged to quash the complaint and proceedings arising therefrom qua the present applicants.
8. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the settlement contending that the offence in question are serious in nature, against the society and are not compoundable.
9. In the case of Gian Singh V/s. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012)10 SCC 303, the Hon'ble Apex Court, in para 61, laid-down the following proposition of law while distinguishing Section 482 from Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Hon'ble Apex provided the illustrative category of cases suitable for settlement and it was observed that heinous crimes like robbery, dacoity and rape etc. cannot be settled and suitability of the cases for settlement will depend upon the facts of each individual case. It was held that even the cases which are not compoundable under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, can be settled under Section 482 of the Code, if the High Court finds the element of settlement. Para 61 reads as under:-
"61. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 28 22:07:16 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/5391/2020 ORDER High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victims family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 28 22:07:16 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/5391/2020 ORDER secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding."
10. Considering the ratio as above, submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor cannot be countenanced. Mere invocation of the provisions for serious offences would not necessarily lead to inference of commission of such offences. It is noticed that in the complaint, half-hearted allegation against the applicants is made and further, when respondent No.2 - complainant has made intention of not supporting the prosecution case, clear by filing an affidavit, chances of prosecution succeeding against the applicants are very bleak. Only achievement in such a trial would be wastage of public time, money and energy. Under the circumstances, it is deemed appropriate to acknowledge the settlement placed on record by way of affidavit by respondent No.2 - complainant.
11. Accordingly, the settlement is acknowledged and the complaint and all connected proceedings arising therefrom, qua the present applicants, are quashed. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs. Direct service is permitted.
(DR. A. P. THAKER, J) VR PANCHAL / SALIM Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 28 22:07:16 IST 2020