Gujarat High Court
Kalpeshsingh @ Lalu Ramsevaksingh ... vs State Of Gujarat & on 13 December, 2017
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/CR.MA/17336/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 17336 of 2015
=============================================
KALPESHSINGH @ LALU RAMSEVAKSINGH BHADAURIYA &
5....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
=============================================
Appearance:
MR MB RANA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 6
MR RAJESH M CHAUHAN, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR.D.M.DEVNANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 13/12/2017
ORAL ORDER
[1] At the outset, this application is not pressed so far as the applicant No.1, namely, Kalpeshsingh @ Lalu Ramsevaksingh Bhadauriya (husband) is concerned. The same is disposed of accordingly.
[2] I am now left to consider the case of the applicant Nos. 2 to 6.
[3] By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying for quashing of the First Information Report being C.R.No. I-65 of 2015 registered with the Ramol Police Station, District: Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 377, 506(1) read with section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Page 1 of 4
HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Wed Dec 13 23:12:44 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/17336/2015 ORDER
[4] It appears from the materials on record that the
respondent No.2 got married with the applicant No.1 on
02.12.2014. Soon after marriage, matrimonial disputes cropped up between the husband and wife, which ultimately, led to the filing of the present FIR. In the FIR by and large allegations of harassment and cruelty have been levelled against the husband. However, as usual in a dispute between the husband and wife, the other family members of the husband have also been implicated.
[5] The applicant No.2 is the father-in-law, the applicant No.3 is the mother-in-law, the applicant No.4 is the brother-in-law, the applicant No.5 is the sister-in-law and the applicant No.6 is the distinct relative of the respondent No.2.
[6] Taking into consideration the nature of the dispute, I thought fit to make an attempt to see that an amicable settlement is arrived at between the husband and wife. In such circumstances on 30.11.2017, the following order was passed:
"The applicant no.1 viz.Kalpeshsingh @ Lalu Ramsevaksingh Bhadauriya is directed to remain personally present before this Court on 07/12/2017. The respondent no.2 shall also remain present before this Court on 07/12/2017. The learned counsel appearing for both the respective parties shall communicate about this order to their clients. Post this matter on 07/12/2017 on top of the board."
[7] The applicant No.1 and the respondent No.2 remained Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Wed Dec 13 23:12:44 IST 2017 R/CR.MA/17336/2015 ORDER present before me. I inquired with them as regards their differences with each other. The respondent No.2 made herself very clear that she would like to reconcile. However, I found the attitude of the husband very adamant. The wife made a request that the husband should come at her parental home and take her along with him to the matrimonial home. The husband very bluntly replied that he would not go to the house of his-in-laws and bring his wife to her matrimonial home. From the attitude of the husband, I could make it out that the reconciliation is not possible or rather is not advisable keeping in mind the safety and security of the respondent No.2.
[8] Having regard to the nature of the allegations, I am of the view that the applicant Nos.2 to 6 should not be prosecuted.
[9] In such circumstances, referred to above, this application is allowed so far as the applicant Nos.2 to 6 are concerned. The First Information Report being C.R.No. I-65 of 2015 registered with the Ramol Police Station, District: Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 377, 506(1) read with section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is hereby quashed so far as the applicant Nos.2 to 6 are concerned. All the consequential proceedings pursuant thereto shall also stand terminated qua the applicant Nos.2 to 6 are concerned . Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent qua the applicant Nos.2 to 6 are concerned. Direct service is permitted. The investigation shall now proceed further in accordance with law so far as the applicant No.1 - husband is concerned.
[10] I take notice of the fact that this petition was admitted
Page 3 of 4
HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Wed Dec 13 23:12:44 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/17336/2015 ORDER
and ad-interim order was also grated, as the same is being vacated so far as the applicant No.1 is concerned. He apprehends arrest. In such circumstances, I grant interim protection of two weeks' to the applicant - husband.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) dharmendra Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Wed Dec 13 23:12:44 IST 2017