Gujarat High Court
Abdul Rasidabeg Hussainbeg Mirza vs State Of Gujarat on 4 August, 2020
Author: Bhargav D. Karia
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
R/CR.MA/8974/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 8974 of 2020
=================================================
ABDUL RASIDABEG HUSSAINBEG MIRZA & 2 other(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
=================================================
Appearance:
MR. R.S.SANJANWALA, SENIOR ADVOCATE with Mr.AADIT
R SANJANWALA(9918) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR NA SHAIKH(1098) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS CM SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
=================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
Date : 04/08/2020
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr.R.S.Sanjanwala assisted by learned advocate Mr.Aadit R.Sanjanwala for the applicants, learned advocate Mr.N.A.Shaikh for the respondent no.2original complainant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms.Chetna M. Shah for the respondent State through video conference.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr.N.A.Shaikh waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Shah waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondentState.
Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Aug 05 21:21:04 IST 2020R/CR.MA/8974/2020 ORDER
3. With the consent of learned advocate for the applicants and learned advocate for respondents, present application is taken up for final disposal today.
4. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants have prayed for quashing of the complaint filed by respondent No.2 through his Power of Attorney Holder Vajid Hussain Yavar Hussain Mirza at the relevant point of time in the year 2012. It appears that respondent No.2 who is residing at U.S.A. has thereafter issued Power of Attorney in favour of one Mr. Nazir Gulam Musufa Mirza in the year 2014 and thereafter renewed the same in the year 2018.
5. Mr.R.S.Sanjanwala, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Aadit R.Sanjanwala, learned advocate for the applicants and Mr.N.A.Shaikh, learned advocate for respondent No.2 submit that the parties have arrived at a settlement as per the settlement deed dated 19.9.2019. Learned advocates have also relied upon the affidavits filed by applicant No.1 and the Power of Attorney Holder of respondent No.2 in support of their submissions.
6. It is also submitted that all civil disputes between the parties have been settled and as per the terms of the settlement deed, the complaint is not required to be proceeded with. Reference is made to the order passed in Special Civil Application No.1376 Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Aug 05 21:21:04 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8974/2020 ORDER of 2016 dated 17.3.2020 which was also allowed in favour of the applicants as per the settlement arrived at between the parties in connection with the revenue entries mutated in favour of the applicants. This Court (Hon'ble Mr.Justice A.Y.Kogje) passed the following order:
"9. Learned advocate for the Applicants submitted that in view of the Memorandum of Settlement the issues in Special Civil Application No.1376 of 2016 no longer survive. It thus, submitted that Special Civil Application No.1376 of 2016 may be made absolute and the same may be disposed off in terms of the terms under the Memorandum of Settlement between the parties and that appropriate orders be passed to quash and set aside the order dated 07.01.2016 passed by the Special Secretary (Appeals) in Revision Application No.149/2012 and the order dated 06.08.2012 passed by the Collector, Surat and accordingly, to confirm Mutation Entry Nos. 1890, 2264, 2512 and 2524. It is submitted that the issues in Special Civil Application No.1376 of 2016 only pertain to mutation entries and as much, Respondent No.5 has not preferred any proceedings before the Civil Court in respect of his claims in the subject land. It is further necessary to clarify that Applicants are no longer required to continue the statement recorded in order dated 03.03.2016 and are thus entitled to transfer/create third party rights in the subject land, as lawful owners.
10. Considering the settlement arrived at between the parties, the petitions stands allowed in terms of the settlement and therefore, order dated 07.01.2016 passed by the Special Secretary (Appeals) in Revision Application No.149/2012 and the Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Aug 05 21:21:04 IST 2020 R/CR.MA/8974/2020 ORDER order dated 06.08.2012 passed by the Collector, Surat in SuoMoto Case No.4 of 2012 are ordered to be quashed and set aside. As a consequence, the Mutation Entry No.1890 dated 01.09.1976; Mutation Entry No.2264 dated 01.07.1983, Mutation Entry No.2512 dated 21.12.1985 and Mutation Entry No.2524 dated 24.1.1986 with regard to land bearing R.S.No.35/2/1, Block No.66 admeasuring 29846 Sq.Mts. Of Atodara, Tal. Olpad, Dist. Surat will stand restored. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs.
Direct service is permitted."
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor objects quashing of present proceedings on the premise of settlement.
8. In view of the above fact situation, it would be futile exercise to continue the criminal proceedings which are lodged in the year 2012 for the alleged offences under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code in F.I.R. No. ICR No.164/2012 registered with Olpad Police Station, Surat and Chargesheet No.I172013 as the dispute with reference to the impugned F.I.R. and the charge sheet is settled and resolved by and between the parties which is confirmed by the original complainant through his learned advocate, the trial would be futile and any further continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, the impugned F.I.R. and charge sheet is required to be quashed and set aside.
Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Aug 05 21:21:04 IST 2020R/CR.MA/8974/2020 ORDER 9. Resultantly, this application is allowed. Impugned F.I.R. No.ICR No.164/2012 registered
with Olpad Police Station, Surat and the Charge sheet No.I172013 and all other consequential proceedings arising out of said FIR are hereby quashed and set aside.
10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Court/authority by Fax or Email.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) NAIR SMITA V./RAGHUNATH NAIR Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Wed Aug 05 21:21:04 IST 2020