Gujarat High Court
Sona Alias Sonal Prajapati vs State Of Gujarat on 7 September, 2018
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
R/CR.MA/11980/2018 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 11980 of 2018
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to No
see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the No
judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law No
as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any
order made thereunder ?
================================================================
SONA ALIAS SONAL PRAJAPATI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
K T BELADIYA(9101) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2
MR MAHESHKUMAR B PATEL(7946) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
MR KP RAVAL, APP (2) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 07/09/2018
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. RULE. Learned APP Mr.K.P.Raval waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.1-State and learned Advocate Mr.Mahesh Patel waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2-complainant.
Page 1 of 3
R/CR.MA/11980/2018 JUDGMENT 2. This application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is filed for quashing of FIR
being I-CR No.66 of 2018 registered with Olpad Police Station, Surat for offences under Sections 171, 323, 342, 384, 504, 114 and 291(A) of the Indian Penal Code, on the ground of settlement arrived at between the parties.
3. Learned Advocate for the applicants submitted that pending the application, due to interpretation of family members, an amicable settlement is arrived at between the parties and the respondent No.2-complainant now does not want to pursue the impugned complaint against the applicants any further and hence, the present application for quashing.
4. Learned Advocate Mr.Mahesh Patel for respondent No.2-complainant submitted that respondent No.2-Nitinbhai Gobarbhai Ukani is present before the Court. He identifies the complainant. The respondent No.2- complainant and victim have filed affidavits ratifying the compromise arrived at between the parties.
5. Learned Advocates for the applicants submitted that the applicants are voluntarily ready to pay cost of Rs.5,000/- as a part of compromise.
6. Considering the nature of allegations made in Page 2 of 3 R/CR.MA/11980/2018 JUDGMENT the FIR, contents of the compromise arrived at between the parties and as the dispute is now amicably settled, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the prosecution of the present applicants.
7. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. I-CR No.66 of 2018 registered with Olpad Police Station, Surat is ordered to be quashed.
8. The applicants are jointly directed to deposit cost of Rs.5,000/- with the Legal Aid Committee, Gujarat High Court.
9. It will be open for the respondent No.2- complainant to file an appropriate application before the trial Court for withdrawal of the amount of Rs.1 lakhs, which may be decided by the trial Court expeditiously and in accordance with law.
10. Rule is made absolute.
Direct service is permitted.
Sd/-
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) SHITOLE Page 3 of 3