Gujarat High Court
Mahesh Rameshchandra Harsh vs State Of Gujarat on 19 July, 2022
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
R/CR.MA/6872/2019 ORDER DATED: 19/07/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 6872 of 2019
==========================================================
MAHESH RAMESHCHANDRA HARSH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DARSHAN DAVE for HL PATEL ADVOCATES(2034) for the Applicant(s)
No. 1
MS SHACHI G MATHUR(3069) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MAITHILI MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 19/07/2022
ORAL ORDER
1 By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the FIR being CR No.I-17 of 2019 lodged at Nakhatrana Police Station, District Kutch on 7.3.2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 295(a) and 153(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
2 Heard learned advocate Mr.Darshan Dave for H.L.Patel Advocates for the applicant, Ms.Maithili Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 and Ms.Sachi Mathur, learned advocate Page 1 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 20 21:11:01 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/6872/2019 ORDER DATED: 19/07/2022 for respondent No.2.
3 As per the impugned FIR, the complainant has stated that on 3.3.2019, a rally was organized by the applicant, wherein some provocative speech was made, which hurt the sentiments of a particular community, and therefore, the impugned FIR was registered against the present applicant. 4 By the consent of learned advocates for the parties, this application is taken up for final hearing.
5 At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Dave points out to the affidavit in reply filed by the applicant on 28.6.2022 and states that the applicant has shown regret for arranging the rally and he has filed an affidavit whereby he has tendered the apology. Today, the applicant is personally present before this Court, who has been identified by learned advocate Mr.Darshan Dave and even orally in presence of the advocate for the respondent No.2 - original complainant, the applicant has tendered unconditional Page 2 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 20 21:11:01 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/6872/2019 ORDER DATED: 19/07/2022 apology with an assurance that in future no such incident shall take place at the instance of the applicant. He further states that he will take care that by any of the act of the applicant, no communal harmony shall be disturbed.
6 Ms.Mathur, learned advocate for the respondent No.2, upon instructions received via whatsapp from the respondent No.2 requesting this Court to take on record the whatsapp communication between learned advocate for respondent No.2 and respondent No.2. Ms.Mathur, learned advocate for the respondent No.2 states that since the respondent No.2 is suffering from paralysis, he could not come personally before this Court for giving his consent for quashing the impugned FIR, but through whatsapp message it is informed that he does not have any objection if the impugned FIR is quashed by taking into consideration the affidavit of the applicant. Learned advocate Ms.Mathur submits that in view of the fact that even orally also unconditional apology is tendered by the applicant, the respondent No.2 does not have any objection if the FIR is quashed. Page 3 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 20 21:11:01 IST 2022
R/CR.MA/6872/2019 ORDER DATED: 19/07/2022 7 Ms.Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State states that considering the fact that communal harmony is the paramount interest of the State if the FIR is quashed as the complainant has no objection if the FIR is quashed, the Court may pass appropriate order in the interest of justice. 8 Considering the submissions made by respective parties and also considering the fact that once the applicant has introspected and has tendered his unconditional apology orally as well as by way of affidavit, this Court is of the view that if such matter is stretched further and the applicant is directed to face the trial in that case there is a possibility that some vested interests may unnecessarily make it an issue of public debate, which may result in disturbance of peace and harmony in the area.
8.1 Considering the overall totality of the facts and considering the fact that till date after the aforesaid rally was arranged, no untoward Page 4 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 20 21:11:01 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/6872/2019 ORDER DATED: 19/07/2022 incident taken place in the area and also considering the fact that the original complainant does not any objection if the FIR is quashed.
9 Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present case and 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) 6 SCC 466, it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicant would be unnecessary harassment to the applicant. 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, Page 5 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 20 21:11:01 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/6872/2019 ORDER DATED: 19/07/2022 the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code. Therefore, the present application is required to be allowed and it is accordingly allowed.
10 Resultantly, the FIR being CR No.I-17 of 2019 lodged at Nakhatrana Police Station, District Kutch and all consequent proceedings thereof are hereby quashed accordingly.
11 At this stage, Mr.Darshan Dave, learned advocate for the applicant, makes a request that the affidavit whereby the applicant has tendered unconditional apology may not be circulated in the society as well as media and for that necessary directions may be issued as the same may create further controversy, and therefore, suitable direction be issued.
12 The aforesaid request is not opposed by Ms.Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Ms.Mathur, learned advocate for respondent No.2. Page 6 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 20 21:11:01 IST 2022
R/CR.MA/6872/2019 ORDER DATED: 19/07/2022 Hence, the Registry is directed not to provide simple copy or certified copy of the aforesaid affidavit to any other person except the present applicant or the State Government. Further, respondent No.2 is directed not to circulate soft-copy of the aforesaid affidavit, which was provided to him by learned advocate Ms.Mathur to obtain consent for quashing the FIR.
13 If it is found that any person has unauthorizely circulated the affidavit filed by the applicant, the applicant is at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law against the person responsible for the same.
14 Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.
Direct service is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) P. SUBRAHMANYAM Page 7 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 20 21:11:01 IST 2022