Gujarat High Court
Kamleshbhai Ishwarbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 24 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 17944 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
KAMLESHBHAI ISHWARBHAI PATEL & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MANAN A SHAH(5412) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR RISHABH R JAIN(12326) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS ASMITA PATEL APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 24/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Considering the issue involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicants and complainant has been resolved amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith. Page 1 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined
2. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the applicants have prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR being C.R.No. 11214031220699 of 2022 registered with Mahuva Police Station, District Surat, for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") as well as other consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
3. The facts giving rise to present application are that the respondent No.2 original complainant resided in Zambia since 1954. The mother of respondent No.2 viz. Paliben @ Parvatiben Lallubhai Nayak resided with brother of the respondent No.2 since long and owned the land bearing survey No.239, 240 (Block No. 280) admeasuring 14,500/- square meters in Village Jol. The brother of the respondent No.2 namely Babubhai Lallubhai Nayak in connivance with other persons forged a bogus will of respondent No. 2's mother Paliben with intention of Page 2 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined grabbing the said land. The will was executed in the presence of witnesses being accused Nos.6 and 7. 3.1 The mother of respondent No.2 passed away on 13.02.1988 and thereafter, on 14.02.1989 on the basis of said bogus will, Babubhai Lallubhai Nayak got his name entered into the revenue records by revenue entry No. 1560 dated 14.2.1989 with forged signature of respondent No.2 and another brother Ramanbhai Lallubhai Nayak. Then in 1992 brother of respondent No.2 - Babubhai Lallubhai Nayak died and on the basis of death of Babubhai Lallubhai Nayak, names of his legal heirs were mutated and subsequently in 2012 i.e. on 5.1.2012, the said land was sold to one Ramanben Bhikhubhai Patel at village Dungarpura, Tal. Kamrej, Dist. Surat, wherein present applicants had signed as witnesses, though they were aware that will executed by the mother Paliben in favour of Babubhai Lallubhai Nayak was forged however, instead of knowing the said facts, they had signed the sale deed.
Page 3 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined 3.2 In view of the aforesaid facts, respondent No.2 has lodged complaint before the Mahuva Police Station, District Surat, against present applicants for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 114 of IPC. Hence, the applicants have filed present application for quashing and setting a aside the said complaint along with all other consequential proceedings.
4. Heard Mr. Manan Shah, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Archit Jain, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Ms. Asmita Patel, learned APP for respondent No.1.
5. Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the dispute had arisen between two brothers and at the relevant point of time, present complainant was not present in the Country. He has submitted that the will was registered in 1988 however, without challenging the subsequent mutation entry by appropriate proceedings, the impugned FIR came to be Page 4 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined lodged to harass the applicants.
5.1 Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that without seeking any declaration or partition in the property, the complainant has put the police machinery into the motion by way of filing impugned FIR.
5.2 Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that even from the bare perusal of the FIR, any offence of forgery was not made against present applicants. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Mohammed Ibrahim and others vs. State of Bihar and another reported in (2009) 8 SCC 751. 5.3 Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that now the dispute between the parties has amicably settled and the original complainant - respondent No.2 has also filed an affidavit with regard to settlement. He, therefore, prays that in light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the impugned FIR and all other consequential proceedings may be Page 5 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined quashed and set aside.
6. Mr. Jani, learned counsel for the original complainant- respondent No.2 herein has submitted that now the parties have amicably settled the dispute and therefore, he has no objection, if the present application is allowed and impugned FIR is quashed and set aside.
7. Ms. Patel, learned APP for the State - respondent No.1 has placed on record a report dated 25.1.2024 received from the concerned Investigating Officer and submits now the parties have amicably settled the dispute and therefore, she has no objection, if the present application is allowed.
8. I have gone through the submissions made by both the learned advocates and perused the record. It appears that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and for that the original complainant has also filed an affidavit dated 02.04.2025 which reads as under:-
"I, Chiragkumar Rajubhai Desai, Male, Aged about 40 Years, Residing at Ranat, Taluka - Mahuva District - Page 6 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined Surat. Through Power of Attorney holder of Balvantrai alias Ballubhai Lallubhai Nayak, Aged about 92 years, Residing at Desai Faliyu, Village Kani, Taluka Mahuva, District Surat, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:-
1. I am the original complainant of FIR being Part-A, C.R. No.11214031220699 of 2023 registered with Mahuva Police Station, District - Surat Rural.
2. I say that I had lodged the FIR in haste, anger and due to some misunderstanding. However, recently upon realizing the true facts, I have entered into amicable settlement with all the petitioners.
3. I say that I am 92 years old. I say that most of the petitioner are my near relative. The dispute between me and petitioners is purely personal and private in nature, which has been resolved by entering into amicable settlement. I do not wish to proceed further with the criminal prosecution against the petitioners.
4. I say that in view of settlement, all misunderstanding, disputes and bitterness are removed between us and now, I have no grievance or dispute against the petitioners. I say that we now have cordial relations. I am therefore not interested to proceed further against the petitioners in pursuance to the FIR or the charge sheet.Page 7 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined
5. I have no objection if the impugned FIR, charge sheet and all proceedings in pursuance thereto are quashed by this Hon'ble Court. I have no grievance against the petitioners and this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this petition, as prayed for.
6. I am filing this affidavit without any force, coercion or thereat and at my free will, wish and desire and with conscious mind.
Solemnly affirmed at Bardoli on this 02 day of April 2025"
9. The above affidavit is filed by the original complainant, wherein he has stated that the dispute between him and applicants is purely personal and private in nature, which has been resolved by entering into an amicable settlement.
10. Further, the report dated 25.1.2024 produced by the Ms. Patel, learned APP is taken on record. From bare perusal of the report filed by the Investigating Officer, the allegation against present applicants is that the applicants were aware that on the basis of the bogus will, the entry was mutated in favour of deceased Babubhai Page 8 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined Lallubhai Nayak and subsequently, in favour of legal heirs of the deceased Babubhai Lallubhai Nayak and on 5.1.2012, the legal heirs of the deceased Babubhai Lallubhai Nayak have sold the said agriculture land to one Ramanben Bhikhubhai Patel, wherein present applicants have singed as a witnesses in the sale deed and have actively participated in the proceedings. Meaning thereby, except signatory to the sale transaction, no other allegations are made against present applicants. Even during the course of investigation, nothing was found against present applicants.
11. It also appears from the record that upto 1992, the brother of the complainant was alive and complainant had not challenged the said will by way of appropriate proceedings nor filed any FIR against the brother. Even after death of his brother, the legal heirs of the brother have entered the names in the revenue record and mutated the entry in favour of legal heirs of the deceased Babubhai Lallubhai Patel and that was also within the Page 9 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined knowledge of the complainant however, the complainant had remained silent for all these years and after long delay, the FIR came to be lodged by the complainant. Even, the subject land was sold on 5.1.2012, and almost after 10 years, impugned FIR came to be lodged by the complainant. On perusal of the materials, it prima facie appear that the offence as alleged by the complainant is not made out against the present applicants. Further, it appears that now the dispute is being settled between two brothers and family members and the original complainant is aged 92 years and also is critically ill condition and during course of investigation, it comes out that except being a signatory to the sale deed, there is no further role attributed to present applicants.
12. It is also appropriate to note herein that the original complainant was enable to remain present before the Court therefore, his wife and son were present through video conference on virtual mode and they have confirmed that the dispute has been settled between the family members and therefore, they have no objection, if Page 10 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined the present application is allowed.
13. Considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application as well as taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), K. Bharthi Devi and another vs. State of Telangana and another reported in (2024) 10 SCC 384, the decision of this Court dated 8.5.2024 in Criminal Misc. Application No.1894 of 2019 and 3.4.2025 in Criminal Misc. Application No.6765 of 2025 and 22.09.2023 in Criminal Misc. Application No. 16920 of 2023 and decision dated 14.09.2023 passed in Special Criminal Application No.11643 of 2023, it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR Page 11 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined against the applicants would be unnecessary harassment to the applicants. It appears that the trial would be futile and further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law and Court and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR and other consequential proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.
14. Resultantly, this application is allowed in terms of amicable settlement arrived at between the parties. The impugned FIR being C.R.No. 11214031220699 of 2022 registered with Mahuva Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 114 of the IPC as well as Criminal Case No. 1598 of 2024 pending in the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bardoli and other consequential proceedings are hereby quashed and set aside qua the present applicants herein.
Accordingly, Rule is made absolute. Page 12 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/17944/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2025 undefined
15. If the applicants are behind the bar, Jail authority as well as Court concerned shall take necessary steps to release the applicants from the jail if they are not required in any other offence.
Direct service is permitted.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) SURESH SOLANKI Page 13 of 13 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 01:05:25 IST 2025