Gujarat High Court
Manjulaben Pramodbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 18 December, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 7662 of 2013
================================================================
MANJULABEN PRAMODBHAI PATEL & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
S V RAJU ASSOCIATES(6030) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
ADVOCATE NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR ANKIT SHAH(6371) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE UNSERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 18/12/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Cr.P.C.") for quashing and setting aside the FIR bearing I-C.R. No.194/2007 registered with Karanj Police Station, District Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 120-B, 416, 200, 199, 294(b), 506(1), 114, 34 and 35 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code).
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Bhadrish Raju through hybrid mode with learned advocate Ms. J. S. Mehta for M/s. S. V. Raju Page 1 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined Associates for the applicants, learned advocate Mr. Ankit Shah for respondent No.3 and learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent-State. Though advocate Notice served, none appeared for respondent No.2.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent and request of the learned advocates for the respective parties, this matter is taken up for hearing.
4. The brief facts of the case are briefly stated as under:-
4.1. The complainant owned ancestral property consisting of land vide Block Nos. 140, 148, and 154, situated in District Sub-
district Ahmedabad-2-Vadaj, Taluka-Daskroi, Village-Jagatpur. One afternoon an unknown individual left a cover outside the complainant's house. Upon opening it, the complainant discovered documents related to the aforementioned ancestral property. The complainant learned that accused had executed Page 2 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined registered deeds bearing Sr.Nos. 7891, 7892, and 7894 on 25/06/2007, copies of which were enclosed in the cover. 4.2. Upon reviewing the deeds, the complainant discovered that accused had forged the signatures, fingerprints and photographs of her and her family members, except her mother and elder sister. Meanwhile, the complainant received a call from one Liyakat Saiyed-accused No.13, who demanded the signatures of complainant and her family members on the deeds. He also revealed that he had finalized a deal for the said land. During the call, he verbally abused complainant, and issued death threats. Similarly, the accused Nos. 1, 8, 11 as well as 12 also contacted complainant one after another for obtaining her and her family members' signatures and also gave death threats. Hence, FIR/Complaint came to be registered against present applicants and other accused.
5. Learned advocate for the applicants submits that with the Page 3 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined intervention of Mediator i.e. respondent No.3, a settlement has been arrived at. Issues raised in the FIR are settled. After mediating with the complainant, the memorandum of understanding (MoU) was executed between the complainant and the said Mediator on 20.09.2013, wherein it was agreed by the complainant that upon execution of the cancellation of sale deeds, the complainant would withdraw all criminal complaints. The said agreement was duly signed by the complainant before a Notary. The applicants executed registered cancellation of sale deed in favour of the complainant as well as the in favour of the other family members of the complainant. It is further submitted that copy of the settlement deed as well as the copy of the cancellation of sale deeds are placed on record at Page Nos.135 and 159 respectively. It is further submitted that in the cancellation deed, in paragraph No.7, it has been mentioned that the sale consideration has also been returned by the original owners in favour of the applicants by way of a demand draft. It is further submitted that thereafter, the complainant rescinded Page 4 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined from the compromise and filed an additional affidavit dated 16.10.2013 before this Court and gave a very false and fabricated reasons for not withdrawing the complaint. 5.1. In support of his submission, learned advocate for the applicants has placed reliance upon two decisions, one is in the case of Mohb. Shamim and others Versus Nahid Begum (smt) and another reported in (2005) 3 Supreme Court Cases 302 and second is in the case of Ruchi Agarwal versus Amit Kumar Agrawal and others reported in (2005) 3 Supreme Court Cases 299 and has submitted that once settlement was arrived at between the parties and once the terms and conditions of the settlement have been complied with by one party, the application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is maintainable and the denial of the settlement by the complainant is not acceptable. Learned advocate for the applicants has further submitted that the applicants have performed their part of the settlement by executing cancellation of sale deeds and subsequently the Page 5 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined complainant has refused to abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement.
5.2. Reliance is also placed on the paragraph Nos.12 to 16 of the decision of Mohb. Shamim and others (supra), which are reproduced as under:-
"12. In view of the fact that the settlement was arrived at the intervention of a judicial officer of the rank of the Additional Sessions Judge, we are of the opinion, the contention of the First Respondent herein to the effect that she was not aware of the contents thereof and the said agreement as also the affidavit which were got signed by her by misrepresentation of facts must be rejected. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we have no doubt in our mind that the denial of execution of the said deed of settlement is an afterthought on the part of the Respondent No.1 herein.
13. Ex facie the settlement between the parties appears to be genuine. If the contention of the First Respondent herein is to be accepted, she would not have accepted the sum of Rs.2,25,000 and in any event, she could have filed an appropriate application in that behalf before the Court of S.N. Gupta, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. What was least expected of her was that she would return the said sum of Rs.2,25,000 to the Appellants herein.
14. Section 406 is a compoundable offence with the permission of the court. It is true that Section 498-A IPC is not compoundable.
15. This Court in Ruchi Agarwal vs. Amit Kumar Agrawal in almost a similar situation has quashed a criminal proceeding against the husband, stating :
" 8. .....Therefore, we are of the opinion that the appellant having received the relief she wanted without contest on the basis of the terms of the compromise, we cannot now accept the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant. In our opinion, the conduct of the appellant indicates that the criminal complaint from which this appeal arises was filed Page 6 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined by the wife only to harass the respondents.
9. In view of the above said subsequent events and the conduct of the appellant, it would be an abuse of the process of the court if the criminal proceedings from which this appeal arises is allowed to continue"
16. In view of the conduct of the First Respondent in entering into the aforementioned settlement, the continuance of the criminal proceeding pending against the Appellants, in our opinion, in this case also, would be an abuse of the process of the court. The Appellant No.1, however, would be entitled to withdraw the sum of Rs.50,000/- which has been deposited in the court. We, therefore, in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India direct that the impugned judgment be set aside. The First Information Report lodged against the Appellants is quashed. The Appeal is allowed. However, this order should not be treated as a precedent."
6. Learned advocate for the respondent No.3, who is representing the Mediator, submits that pending this petition, respondent No.3 was added as party and the Mediator has filed an affidavit dated 20.09.2013 at Page No.341 and submitted that the respondent No.3 was a Mediator and during the meetings of the mediation with the complainant, a compromise was arrived at, whereby the complainant agreed to withdraw all pending cases against the applicants being FIR I-C.R.No.194 of 2007 registered with Kanranj Police Station, Ahmedabad City on 08.09.2007 and all the proceedings in Criminal Case No.3417 of Page 7 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined 2007 pending in the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Court No.5, Ahmedabad. It is further stated in the affidavit that the applicants have fulfilled their part of the obligations by executing reverse sale deeds of the land in dispute in favour of the complainant and her family members. It is also averred in the affidavit that land in dispute was also sold out to third party.
7. Per contra, learned APP for the respondent-State has submitted that pursuant to the impugned FIR, charge-sheet has been filed and charge has been framed on 29.12.2008 by learned Magistrate and the matter is at the stage of evidence of prosecution. It is further submitted that complainant who has filed reply in the present proceedings, which is produced at page No.341, indicates that arrangement of the reversing the land in the name of the respondent No.2 and thereby, selling to the third party was only with a view to sell the disputed property. It is also alleged in the affidavit that huge loss has already been occurred to the respondent No.2 due to the fraudulent conduct Page 8 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined on the part of the applicants by making the clear property of respondent No.2 as a disputed one. By placing reliance upon the averments made in the affidavit-in-reply of respondent No.2- original complainant, learned APP would submit that offence is made out against the applicants and this Court may not quash the impugned FIR.
8. I have considered rival submissions of the learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the impugned FIR and other material which is placed on record for my consideration. The grievance which has been raised by the complainant is to the effect that the sale deed which was executed in favour of the applicants is bogus sale deed and the same has been executed with the fraudulent intention and the sale consideration amount has not been received by any of the land owners. It is also alleged that all accused in connivance with each other have forged documents and executed registered sale deed. The impugned FIR was filed on 25.06.2007 and after Page 9 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined the investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted and as per the submissions of the learned APP, on 29.12.2008, charge has been framed against the applicants. Pending the proceedings before the learned Magistrate, the respondent No.3-Mr. Aparn Shah was appointed as Mediator who mediated the dispute with the complainant and pursuant to the mediation, settlement deed dated 16.07.2010 was executed between the complainant and the Mediator-respondent No.3. The said Mediator also entered into MoU with the other family members of the complainant. Copies of the MoU are produced at page Nos.135 to 158. Pursuant to the said MoU, the applicants executed a cancellation deed of registered sale deed on 16.07.2010 and reversed the sale transaction in favour of the complainant and the family members of the complainant. It appears from the covenant of cancellation of sale deed that applicants have received the amount of consideration by way of demand draft dated 10.07.2010 from the complainant and her family members. Page 10 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined
9. The undisputed fact which is culled out from the record is that allegations of the complainant with regard to the execution of the sale deeds in favour of applicants was set to rest by way of settlement arrived at between the complainant and the Mediator and the registered sale deeds have stood cancelled and after getting the benefits of the settlement, it seems that the complainant has taken a somersault by filing the affidavit in the present proceedings and took a very unreasonable and unsustainable stand by stating in para 4 of the affidavit that the settlement was arrived at between the parties with a view to sell the disputed land. It is highly improbable that when applicants were title holder and without a decree of Civil Court for cancellation of disputed sale deed, the applicants agreed to sell the disputed land to any third party. Such conduct of applicant speaks that both the parties agreed to get the sale deed cancelled and in turn, complainant would withdraw all complaints filed against applicants. The contention raised in the affidavit-in-reply at page No.348 in para No.8 also reflect malafile conduct of the Page 11 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined complainant. The paragraph No.8 of the said affidavit is reproduced hereinunder:-
"8) It is submitted that, assuming for the moment that even, according to the petitioner, if any settlement arrived at between the petitioner and the Respondent no.2 and the Respondent no.2 is backing out of that agreement, in that event, in my respectful submission, proper course and remedy available to the petitioner is else where and not before this Hon'ble High Court too under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Hence, the present petition may be dismissed by this Hon'ble High Court."
10. The affidavit of the complainant makes it clear that complainant is an unscrupulous litigant who has no moral and no respect for her own words. It seems that intention of the complainant is to see that applicants are being harassed and faced criminal proceedings. Even if the allegations made in the complaint / FIR are read in between, the chances of conviction is highly improbable and more particularly, after arriving at settlement between the parties. This Court has also taken into account the conduct of respondent No.2. The record reveals that upon issuance of the fresh Rule, when the Investigating Officer, Karanj Police, Ahmedabad City went to serve fresh Rule issued by this Court to the complainant, it was found that complainant Page 12 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined is not residing at the same address which is mentioned in the cause-title of the application. Such litigation should be nipped it in the bud.
11. In the case of Ruchi Agarwal (supra), in the paragraph Nos.6, 7 and 9, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:-
"6. From the above narrated facts, it is clear that in the compromise petition filed before the Family Court, the appellant admitted that she has received Stridhan and maintenance in lump sum and that she will not be entitled to maintenance of any kind in future. She also undertook to withdraw all proceedings civil and criminal filed and initiated by her against the respondents within one month of the compromise deed which included the complaint under Sections 498A, 323 and 506 IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act from which complaint this appeal arises. In the said compromise, the respondent- husband agreed to withdraw his petition filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act pending before the Senior Judge, Civil Division, Rampur and also agreed to give a consent divorce as sought for by the appellant.
7. It is based on the said compromise the appellant obtained a divorce as desired by her under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act and in partial compliance of the terms of the compromise she withdrew the criminal case filed under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code but for reasons better known to her she did not withdraw that complaint from which this appeal arises. That apart after the order of the High Court quashing the said complaint on the ground of territorial jurisdiction, she has chosen to file this appeal. It is in this background, we will have to appreciate the merits of this appeal.
9. In view of the above said subsequent events and the conduct of the appellant, it would be an abuse of the process of the court if the criminal proceedings from which this appeal arises is allowed to continue. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion to do complete justice, we should while dismissing this appeal also quash proceedings arising from the Criminal Case No.Cr.No.224/2003 registered in Police Station, Bilaspur, (Distt.Rampur) filed under Sections 498A, 323 and 506 IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the respondents herein. It is ordered accordingly. The appeal is disposed of."Page 13 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined The Apex Court in the aforesaid decision, observed that when the complainant has received the benefits of the reversal of the sale deeds, the conduct of the complainant indicates that the criminal complaint was filed by the wife only with a view to harass the respondent.
12. In the case of Mohb. Shamim and others (supra), the Hon'ble has observed in paragraph Nos. 13 and 15, which are quoted as under:-
"13. Ex facie the settlement between the parties appears to be genuine. If the contention of the First Respondent herein is to be accepted, she would not have accepted the sum of Rs.2,25,000 and in any event, she could have filed an appropriate application in that behalf before the Court of S.N. Gupta, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. What was least expected of her was that she would return the said sum of Rs.2,25,000 to the Appellants herein.
15. This Court in Ruchi Agarwal vs. Amit Kumar Agrawal in almost a similar situation has quashed a criminal proceeding against the husband, stating :
" 8. .....Therefore, we are of the opinion that the appellant having received the relief she wanted without contest on the basis of the terms of the compromise, we cannot now accept the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant. In our opinion, the conduct of the appellant indicates that the criminal complaint from which this appeal arises was filed by the wife only to harass the respondents.
9. In view of the above said subsequent events and the Page 14 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined conduct of the appellant, it would be an abuse of the process of the court if the criminal proceedings from which this appeal arises is allowed to continue"
It has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid decision that the denial of execution of deed of settlement was an afterthought and cannot be executed in view of the fact that the settlement was arrived at the intervention of the judicial officer of the rank of Additional Sessions Judge.
13. In the present case, the Mediation process was undertaken with the consent of the complainant and MoU was executed between the complainant and Mediator. Pursuant to the MoU, registered cancellation of sale deeds were executed by the applicants in favour of the complainant and her family members.
14. In view of the above discussions and in view of the peculiar set of facts, I am of the view that if the criminal proceedings are allowed to be proceeded against the applicants, it would be an abuse of the process of law and chances of Page 15 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined conviction are weak looking to the development, which has taken place during the pendency of the criminal proceedings.
15. In case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the Apex Court has set out the categories of cases in which the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised and held in para 102 as under:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Art. 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised :
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an Page 16 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7662/2013 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024 undefined ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
16. In the result, the petition is allowed. The impugned FIR bearing I-C.R. No.194/2007 registered with Karanj Police Station, District Ahmedabad as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. Complainant is saddled with a cost of Rs.20,000/- for not remaining fair with the Court and for wasting the precious time of the Court in deciding the application. Registry is directed to take appropriate steps for the recovery of cost amount from the complainant-respondent No.2.
(D. M. DESAI,J) RINKU MALI Page 17 of 17 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Wed Jan 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jan 03 22:20:05 IST 2025