Gujarat High Court
Sagarbhai S/O. Balubhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 26 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 1381 of 2020
==========================================================
SAGARBHAI S/O. BALUBHAI HIRPARA(PATEL)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YH MOTIRAMANI(3720) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.DIVYESH G NIMAVAT(3757) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
D K PATEL(7571) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. CHINTAN DAVE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 26/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned advocate Mr. Y.H Motiramani for the petitioner, learned advocate Mr. D.K Patel for the respondent No.2 and learned APP Mr. Chintan Dave for the respondent No.1 State.
1. By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs :
"A) that the Honourable Court be pleased to quash FIR bearing C.R. No.II-3080/2019 dated 17.05.2019 lodged at Sola High Police Station by one Ganpatbhai Bhikhabhai Senma against the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable u/s 323, 294(b), 506 日 of Indian Penal Code and sections 3[1]ir) and 3 of The Scheduled Caste and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989;Page 1 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025 undefined (B) pending hearing and final disposal of this application, the Honourable Court be pleased to stay further investigation of FIR bearing C.R. No.11-3080/2019 dated 17.05.2019 lodged at Sola High Police Station by one Ganpatbhai Bhikhabhai Senma against the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable u/s.323, 294(b), 506(1) of Indian Penal Code and sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of The Scheduled Caste and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989;
(C) for costs;
(D) for such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice."
2. The petitioner is working as Branch Manager with India Infoline Finance Ltd (for short "IIFL") in their office at Ahmedabad. The respondent No.2 original complainant and his family members have availed loan facility from IIFL by pledging golden articles.
2.1 According to the complaint, the respondent No.2 got a telephone call from the petitioner for visiting the office on 15.5.2019. The respondent No. 2 visited the petitioner at his office and was told to pay up the interest on outstanding loan amounts or else golden articles shall be sold off.
2.2 According to the petitioner the impugned FIR was Page 2 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025 undefined transferred to SC/ST Cell for investigation. The petitioner has cooperated with the investigating agency and submitted to have given the CCTV footage.
2.3 The petitioner states that respondent No. 2 and his family members had paid their loan amount and have also received their golden articles back from IIFL on 17.7.2019.
2.4 The respondent No. 2 has pledged that they have received back all their pledged golden articles.. The petitioner is filing this petition as no grievance survives. Hence this petition.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Mortiramani appearing for the petitioner would submit that the FIR is gross abuse of process of law and he would submit that the petitioner is a Manager in IIFL. He would further submit that the complainant has pledged his gold articles before IIFL and obtained loan. He would further submit that since the complainant and his family members were not paying the interest on the loan, the complainant and his family members was called to the office of IIFL and he was directed to clear the outstanding amount of loan interest. Apart from that, no other aspect or other talks or any aggravated situation arises. He would further submit that even if the FIR is taken as the gospel truth, it does not attract the offence under Sections 323, 294(b) and 506 (1) of the Indian Penal Code (for short "the IPC") and Sections of the Scheduled Caste and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Page 3 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025 undefined Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3.1 Learned advocate would further submit that as per FIR the entire incident even if happened it happened within the four corners of the office and obviously it did not occur within the public view. He would further submit that the FIR is silent whether the petitioner has taken any treatment to the alleged hurt which could attract the offence under Section 323 of the IPC. He would further submit that there is no words stated in the FIR which attracted the offence under Sections 294(b) or 506(1) of the IPC. In view of above, learned advocate Mr. Motiramani submits that the FIR being gross abuse of process of law requires to be quashed. He has further referred to Annexure D and submitted that the gold articles are already with the complainant and he has settled the account with the IIFL.
3.2 Learned advocate for the petitioner has also referred to affidavit of respondent No. 2 (at page No. 26) and submitted that respondent No. 2 agreed to quash the FIR and file the affidavit before the Court but however, he did not remain present to support his affidavit on the ground that he was asked to repay the amount of compensation paid by the State Government. Mainly on the above submission, learned advocate Mr. Motiramani submit to allow this petition and to quash the FIR against the petitioner.
4. Learned advocate Ms Megha Dave for learned advocate Mr. Page 4 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025 undefined D.K Patel for the private respondent No.2 could not turn away from the affidavit filed by the respondent No. 2 and submitted that at one point of time the complainant was ready to quash the FIR by giving the consent but since it was asked to repay the amount of compensation which he obtained for filing of the FIR he did not turn up. In the circumstances, she submitted to pass necessary order.
5. Learned APP places on record the report signed by Roshni P. Solanki ACP, (SC/ST Cell 1) Ahmedabad City, and submitted that CCTV footage has been collected which indicates that no aggravated talks had taken place between the complainant and the accused. The CCTV footage also indicates that talk between the complainant and the accused took place in a close cabin. In this regard he submitted to pass necessary order. He further submitted that if the Court is quashing the FIR the concerned department of the Government may be permitted to recover the amount of compensation granted to the complainant and his family membes as the complaint is found to be false.
6. Having heard learned advocates for both the sides and considering the FIR on record the undisputed facts arise that :
(a) That the petitioner is the Manager of IIFL;
(b) The complainant has obtained loan from IIFL to pledge his gold articles;
(c) The complainant was in default of paying the interest on the Page 5 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025 undefined loan;
(d) He was called to office to tell him to pay the interest which is outstanding;
(e) Whatever the talk took place between the complainant and the accused it was within the office premises of IIFL;
(f) The CCTV footage obtained in the investigation does indicate that no aggravated talks took place between the complainant and accused to contradict the statement of the first informant;
(e) Subsequent to filing of the FIR, the complainant settled the account with IIFL and the pledged gold articles are returned (Annexure D);
(f) The complainant has filed the affidavit at page 26 and stated that he has no objection, if the FIR is quashed and since the issue has been amicably resolved;
7. It is the submission of learned advocate for both the sides that the complainant and his family members did not turn up on the ground that he was told to pay back the amount of compensation which he has received on filing the complaint.
8. In the aforesaid circumstances, in the aforesaid undisputed facts, this Court is of the opinion that if the complaint/FIR is examined it is sheer abuse of process of law. It appears that the complainant filed the FIR to avoid non-payment of interest after obtaining loan from the IIFL. It also appears that the incident took Page 6 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025 undefined place within four corners of the office of IIFL and therefore, the essential ingredients of the offence under the Atrocities Act that the derogatory words are spoken with the public view are not attracted.
9. At this juncture, this Court refers to the judgment in the case of 14. In the case of Gorige Pentaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. - (2008) 12 SCC 531, Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under :
"6. In the instant case, the allegation of respondent No.3 in the entire complaint is that on 27.5.2004, the appellant abused them with the name of their caste. According to the basic ingredients of Section 3(1)(x) of the Act, the complainant ought to have alleged that the accused-appellant was not a member of the Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and he (respondent No. 3) was intentionally insulted or intimidated by the accused with intent to humiliate in a place within public view. In the entire complaint, nowhere it is mentioned that the accused-appellant was not a member of the Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and he intentionally insulted or intimidated with intent to humiliate respondent No. 3 in a place within public view. When the basic ingredients of the offence are missing in the complaint, then permitting such a complaint to continue and to compel the appellant to face the rigmarole of the criminal trial would be totally unjustified leading to abuse of process of law."
10. Further if we go through the FIR there is no allegations of the complainant being pushed and nowhere it is mentioned that the complainant was hurt. The offence under Sections 294(b) and 506(1) of the IPC are not attracted as the essential ingredients are completely missing on reading the FIR. No specific words are stated in the FIR which could attract the either of the offence. What is further to be noticed that no alarm has been caused to the Page 7 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025 undefined petitioner on giving threat with dire consequences.
10.1 In all what could be noticed is that the FIR is filed with oblique purpose to deviate from paying the interest on the loan or the loan amount after obtaining it and to threaten the IIFL not to sell the pledged gold articles. The criminal process has been misused by the complainant.
10.2. At this juncture I may refer to the judgment in the case of In the case of State of Haryana Vs. B.Bhajanlal & ors., AIR 1992 SC 604, the Hon'ble Apex Court summed up the proposition of law, which reads as under:-
"(1) Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations ins the F.I.R. and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under S.156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of S.155(2) of the code.
(3) Where, the uncontroverted allegations made in the F.I.R. or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same donot disclose the commission of any offence and make out the case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under S.155(2) of the Code.Page 8 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/1381/2020 ORDER DATED: 26/08/2025 undefined (5) Whether, the allegations made in the F.I.R. 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 bare engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) toi the institution 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 malafide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
10.3 The findings of the Hon'ble Apex Court in para 1,3 and 7 are attracted in the present case. In view of above, present petition deserves consideration.
11. In view of the aforesaid, this petition is ALLOWED. The impugned FIR C.R. No.II-3080/2019 dated 17.05.2019 lodged at Sola High Court Police Station and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom the same FIR are quashed and set aside.
11.2 Before parting, at the request of learned APP to recover the amount of compensation from the complainant and his family members for filing a false complaint is granted.
12. Direct Service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) MARY VADAKKAN Page 9 of 9 Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Thu Aug 28 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Aug 28 22:46:31 IST 2025