Gujarat High Court
Bharatiben Chnadrakant Kapadiya vs State Of Gujarat on 25 March, 2022
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/CR.MA/21463/2017 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 21463 of 2017
==========================================================
BHARATIBEN CHNADRAKANT KAPADIYA & 1 other(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KUNAL S SHAH(5282) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR ISHAN MIHIR PATEL(6508) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MD MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 25/03/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr.Kunal Shah on behalf of the applicants, learned APP Ms.Mehta for the respondent State and learned Advocate Mr.Ishan Patel for respondent No.2.
2. By way of this application, the applicants pray for quashing of the complaint being Criminal Misc. Application No.300 of 2016 initiated under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat, District Surat.
3. Learned Advocate Mr. Shah appearing on behalf of the applicants would submit that the present application is being preferred by the accused Nos.2 and 3 being the father-in-law and the mother-in-law of the complainant and whereas the learned Advocate would submit that subsequent to filing of the present application, the complainant as well as the accused No.1 being husband and wife have got divorced from each other, and they have settled in Canada. Learned Advocate would Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 29 20:45:15 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/21463/2017 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2022 submit that perusal of the relief sought in the Criminal Misc. Application No.300/2016 reveals that while prayers No.1 and 2 are with regard to protecting the respondent No.2 from further domestic violence, prayer No.3 is with regard to providing a suitable accommodation to respondent No.2. Mr.Shah would submit that in view of the divorce between accused No.1 and respondent No.2, such prayers may not be required to be considered. Insofar as prayer No.3 and 4 are concerned, Mr.Shah states that the same are relatable to the husband and not to the in-laws and prayer 5 being a general payer is again not relatable to the in-laws. Learned Advocate would submit that having regard to the fact that the husband and wife have got divorced and the prayers, more particularly prayers No.3 to 5 not being relatable to the applicants herein, this Court may quash the said proceedings insofar as the applicants are concerned.
4. The present application is vehemently opposed by learned Advocate Mr.Ishan Patel, who would submit that the complaint had been preferred by the complainant at the time when she had married with accused No.1 and whereas the subsequent development may not have any bearing on the allegations levelled at the relevant point of time. Learned Advocate, therefore, would submit that relying upon the submissions of the learned Advocate appearing for the applicants this Court may not interfere with the impugned FIR.
5. Learned APP Ms.Mehta would submit that considering the submissions of learned Advocate Mr.Patel for the applicants, more particularly considering subsequent developments, this Court may pass appropriate orders.
6. Heard learned Advocates for the parties.
7. It appears that subsequent to filing of the application, the complainant Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 29 20:45:15 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/21463/2017 ORDER DATED: 25/03/2022 and the accused No.1 i.e. the husband of the complainant have got divorced from each other. This Court is also inclined to accept the submissions of learned Advocate Mr.Shah that prayers No.1 and 2 being prayers, which would only be required to be granted if the marriage between the accused No.1 and respondent No.2 had subsisted, would become infructuous immediately, upon complainant and the accused No.1 getting divorced. Insofar as prayers 3, 4, and 5 are concerned, the prayers are relatable to the domestic violence etc., allegations of which are against the accused No.1 - husband.
8. Having regard to the same, in considered opinion of this Court, after the divorce between the accused No.1 and complainant wife, permitting proceedings to proceed any further insofar as the present applicants are concerned, would be nothing but an exercise in futility. Having regard to the same, the impugned criminal complaint being Criminal Misc. Application No.300 of 2016 initiated under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Surat, District Surat and further proceedings arising therefrom are quashed and set aside insofar as the present applicants are concerned.
9. The present application is allowed accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J) V.V.P. PODUVAL Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 29 20:45:15 IST 2022