Upendra Bhavanishankar Mehta & 5 vs State Of Gujarat & on 13 January, 2015

[Cites 7, Cited by 2]

Gujarat High Court

Upendra Bhavanishankar Mehta & 5 vs State Of Gujarat & on 13 January, 2015

Bench: A.J.Desai

         R/CR.MA/21258/2014                                        ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
                         FIR/ORDER) NO. 21258 of 2014

================================================================
         UPENDRA BHAVANISHANKAR MEHTA & 5....Applicant(s)
                            Versus
              STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR HB CHAMPAT WITH MR JV VAGHELA, ADVOCATE for the Applicants
MR CHETAN B RAVAL, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR LB DABHI APPfor the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI

                               Date : 13/01/2015


ORAL ORDER

1 Mr. Chetan B. Raval, learned Advocate, states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of respondent No.2 - original complainant and prosecutrix and shall file his appearance on or before 15.1.2015. He has placed an affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.2

- original complainant and also identified the complainant who is personally present in the court.

2 RULE. Waived by learned APP Mr. L.B. Dabhi for respondent No.1

- State and learned Advocate Mr. Chetan B. Raval, for respondent No.2. original complainant. With the consent of learned Advocates appearing for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.



3      Learned   Advocates   appearing   for   the   parties   have   jointly 



                                     Page 1 of 3
           R/CR.MA/21258/2014                                           ORDER

requested to quash the impugned FIR mainly on the ground that the matter is settled between the parties.

4 Brief facts which arise from the record are as under:

That respondent No.2 Roozina has lodged an FIR before Sola High Court Police Station on 20.3.2012 against the present applicant making allegations with regard to rape and for that the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323, 506(2) and 114 of the IPC as well as under Section135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act, came to be registered. At the end of investigation, a chargesheet came to be filed before the 6 th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural), Ahmedabad, which came to be registered as Sessions Case No. 130 of 2014. At the end of investigation, a chargesheet came to be filed.

5 Learned Advocate Mr. Vaghela, for the applicants would submit that the complainant lodged the FIR under misunderstanding as stated by her in her affidavit and she does not want to proceed further with the case. It is also stated by her that she is going to marry another person. Therefore, she is not interested to proceed further with her complaint which is lodged way back in the year 2012. Hence, the impugned FIR and all other proceedings initiated pursuant thereto may be quashed and set aside.

6 On the other hand, learned Advocate Mr. L.B. Dabhi, has opposed this application and submitted that the applicants have committed serious offence under Section376 of the IPC, etc, the impugned FIR may not he quashed.

7 I have heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties. Perused the investigation papers as well as the Affidavit filed on behalf of the complainant. Affidavit filed by the complainant is Page 2 of 3 R/CR.MA/21258/2014 ORDER relevant which is reproduced below:

" I say that the matter is now settled between me and the present the present petitioners and I do not have any grievances against the petitioners. I further say that I have settled in Delhi and at present doing job. I say that there was some misunderstanding between me and the petitioners and, hence, the said FIR came to be lodged, but now everything is settled between me and the petitioners and I do not wish to prosecute the petitioners. I say that, therefore, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I do not wish to prosecute against the present petitioner. Therefore, if the Sessions Case No. 130/2014 pending before the Hon'ble District and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) arising out of CR No. I79 of 2012 lodged with Sola High Court Police Station are quashed and set aside, then I have no objection."

8 It appears from the aforesaid affidavit that the applicant prosecutrix is engaged with some other person and is going to marry with him in the near future and it would be embarrassing position for her to appear before the court.

9 Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the present application requires consideration. Hence, the present application is allowed. The impugned FIR being CR No. I79 of 2012 lodged with Sola High Court Police Station for the offenses under Sections 376, 506(2), 323 and 114 of the IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act as well as Criminal Case No. 130 of 2014 pending before the District & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule made absolute accordingly. DS is permitted.

(A.J.DESAI, J.) pnnair Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court