Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 15]

Gujarat High Court

Babulal Sukhdev Mali & 2 vs State Of Gujarat & on 26 July, 2017

Author: A.J.Desai

Bench: A.J.Desai

                R/CR.MA/18388/2017                                                  ORDER




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
                                FIR/ORDER) NO. 18388 of 2017

         ==========================================================
                        BABULAL SUKHDEV MALI & 2....Applicant(s)
                                       Versus
                         STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR PAWAN A BAROT, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 3
         MR MITESH AMIN, LD.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================
          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI

                                      Date : 26/07/2017


                                       ORAL ORDER

1. Mr.Y.J.Patel, learned advocate states that he has instruction to appear on behalf of respondent No.2 - original complainant and shall file his appearance at the earliest. He has identified the original complainant, who is present in the Court and states that the matter is settled between the parties.

2. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

3. Rule. Mr.Mitesh Amin, learned Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule on behalf respondent No.1 - State of Gujarat and Mr.Y.J.Patel, learned advocate waives service of Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Thu Jul 27 01:21:53 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/18388/2017 ORDER Rule on behalf of respondent No.2 - original complainant.

4. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants have prayed to quash the FIR being C.R.No.I- 49 of 2017 lodged with Vyara Police Station, Tapi, for the offence punishable under sections 363, 366, 376(2)(h), 114, etc. of the Indian Penal Code; u/s.4, 8, 17, etc. of POCSO Act and u/s.3(2)(5), 3(1)W(i), etc. of the Atrocity Act as well as all the consequential proceedings arising from the said FIR.

5. Mr.Y.J.Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original complainant has identified original complainant, who is present in the Court and who has filed Affidavit dated 20/07/2017, which is taken on the record. It appears from the Affidavit that compromise has been arrived at between the parties and original complainant has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed.

6. Learned advocate appearing for the applicants placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Gian Singh versus State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2012(10)SCC 303 as well as in the case of Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. V/s. Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr. reported in [2013(3)] 54 (3) G.L.R 1875 and submitted that since the matter is settled between the parties, there is no need to proceed further with the trial.

It is the case of applicants that now there is no dispute between the applicants and original complainant.

7. Mr.Mitesh Amin, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this application and submitted that considering the Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Thu Jul 27 01:21:53 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/18388/2017 ORDER nature and gravity of the offence, the impugned FIR may not be quashed.

8. I have heard learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the impugned FIR as well as Affidavit filed by the original complainant dated 20/07/2017, which reads as under:

"I, the undersigned, Maltiben @ Shivaniben W/o Jitukumar Dhansukhbhai Kedawala (Thakkar), Aged: 38 years, Hindu by region, Respondent No.2 in the petition filed by the Babulal Sukhdev Mali and other for the purpose of quashing of the FIR filed by me vide Ist CR No.49 of 2017 before Vyara Police Station, Tapi states on oath that:-
1. I have lodged the present complaint in some misconception of fact and in spar of moment infect the petitioner is my neighbour and we know him and when my daughter, Laxmi @ Divya, came back I came to know that she voluntarily gone with the present petitioner and there is not any promise or pressure or force by the present petitioner and the alleged allegation had not taken place at any point of time and therefore my misunderstanding is now resolved and I do not want to continue with my complaint and if the same is quashed by this Hon'ble Court for the same I do not have any objection and I support the prayer prayed by the petitioner.
2. I further say and stated that because of the intervention of the heard of the society and family members now the dispute between both the parties is amicably settled and I do not want to further precede the said matter and if the FIR is quashed and set aside then I do not have any objection.
3. I further say and submitted that I am filing this affidavit at my will and wish there is not any threat, pressure or undue influence for filing of Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Thu Jul 27 01:21:53 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/18388/2017 ORDER the present affidavit, because of the settlement between us I am filing the present affidavit.

I state that what is stated herein above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief and I believe the same to be true.

Solemnly affirmed on this 20th day of July,2017 at Vyara."

9. It appears from the Affidavit that the applicants and respondent No.2 - original complainant have jointly arrived at compromise and the original complainant has no grievance against the applicants and the matter is amicably settled between the parties.

10. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is now resolved, the present application is allowed. The FIR being C.R.No.I- 49 of 2017 lodged with Vyara Police Station, Tapi, for the offence punishable under sections 363, 366, 376(2)(h), 114, etc. of the Indian Penal Code; u/s.4, 8, 17, etc. of POCSO Act and u/s.3(2)(5), 3(1)W(i), etc. of the Atrocity Act as well as all the consequential proceedings arising from the said FIR, are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants only. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

Direct service is permitted.

[A.J.DESAI, J.] *dipti Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Thu Jul 27 01:21:53 IST 2017