Gujarat High Court
Kaustubh Pranav Shrivastav vs State Of Gujarat on 13 October, 2021
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/SCR.A/9787/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 9787 of 2021
=============================================
KAUSTUBH PRANAV SHRIVASTAV
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=============================================
Appearance:
MR RUTVIJ S OZA(5594) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS POONAM M MAHETA(11265) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR YV VAGHELA(2450) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS.KRINA CALLA APP(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 13/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
[1] Considering the issues 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 applicant and respondent No.2 has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith.
[2] Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.
[3] By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside F.I.R. bearing C.R.No.143 of 2018 registered with A- Division Traffic Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 177, 184 & 134B of the Motor Vehicles Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:50:53 IST 2022 R/SCR.A/9787/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2021 Act, Sections 3 & 7 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and to quash all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicant.
[4] Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
[5] Both the learned advocates would submit that during the pendency of present application, the matter is amicably settled amongst the parties and therefore, any further continuation of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would create hardship to the parties and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.
[6] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the present application and submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence, the complaint in question may not be quashed and the present application may be rejected.
[7] Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has placed on record the settlement Affidavits duly sworn by respondent No.2 and victim, which is at Annexure-B to the petition. The respondent No.2 as well as victim have filed affidavi ts stating inter-alia the fact that the matter is amicably settled with the applicant. The respondent No.2 as well as victim are present in person before the Court and are identified by learned advocate for respondent No.2 and also admits the contents of the Affidavit. On inquiry made by the Court, the respondent No.2 has declared before this Court that the dispute between the applicant(s) and original complainant is resolved and Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:50:53 IST 2022 R/SCR.A/9787/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2021 therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. It is therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed.
[8] Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and considering the facts of settlement and law laid down by the Apex Court [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),] this Court is of the considered view that further continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR would nothing but unnecessary harassment to the parties and trial thereon would be futile and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Thus, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.
[9] Resultantly, this application is allowed and the impugned FIR bearing C.R.No.143 of 2018 registered with A- Division Traffic Police Station, Ahmedabad filed against present applicant is hereby quashed and set aside and all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside qua the applicant. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute. Direct service permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) Manoj Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 23:50:53 IST 2022