Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1165 (GUJ)

Sameerbhai Lallubhai Kosiya v. State of Gujarat

2017-07-03

A.J.DESAI

body2017
ORDER : A.J. DESAI, J. Mr. Pawan Barot, learned advocate states that he has instruction to appear on behalf of respondent No. 2-original complainant and shall file his appearance at the earliest. He has identified the original complainant, who is present in the Court and states that the matter is settled between the parties. 2. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. 3. Rule. Mr. L.B Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule on behalf respondent No. 1-State of Gujarat and Mr. Barot, learned advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No. 2 - original complainant. 4. By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant has prayed to quash the FIR being C.R No. I-36 of 2017 lodged with Sarthana Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under sections 366, 376, 506(2), etc. of the Indian Penal Code as well as all the consequential proceedings arising from the said FIR. 5. Mr. Pawan Barot, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original complainant has identified original complainant, who is present in the Court and who has filed Affidavit dated 21/06/2017, which is taken on the record. It appears from the Affidavit that compromise has been arrived at between the parties and original complainant has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed. 6. Learned advocate appearing for the applicant placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 as well as in the case of Jitendra Raghuvanshi v. Babita Raghuvanshi reported in 2013(3) G.L.R 1875 and submitted that since the matter is settled between the parties, there is no need to proceed further with the trial. 7. It is the case of applicant that now there is no dispute between the applicant and original complainant. 8. Mr. L.B Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed this application and submitted that considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the impugned FIR may not be quashed. 9. 7. It is the case of applicant that now there is no dispute between the applicant and original complainant. 8. Mr. L.B Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed this application and submitted that considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the impugned FIR may not be quashed. 9. I have heard learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the impugned FIR as well as Affidavit filed by the original complainant dated 21/06/2017, which reads as under: “I, the undersigned Paritaben Vivkebhai Savaliya, Age: 20 years, Occupation: House-hold, Sex: Female, Residing at: Flat No.A-4/1004, Vrajraj Residency, B/s. Vraj Vatika, Sarthana, Surat and Respondent No. 2 in the petition filed by the Sameerbhai Lallbhai Kosiya for the purpose of quashing of the FIR filed by me vide Ist CR No. 36 of 2017 before Sarthana Police Station, state on oath and solemnly affirm that: I say and submit that as due to intervention of the respected members of the society and family mutual understanding and agreement is arrived between me and original accused/applicant in the above said F.I.R. I.e. Sameerbhai Lallbhai Kosiya i.e. applicant/accused and now I don't have any grievance with them. I further state that as such now I intend that I have no objection if the FIR is quashed filed against Sameerbhai Lallbhai Kosiya applicant/accused. I state that what is stated herein above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief and I believe the same to be true. Solemnly affirmed on this 21st day of June, 2017.” 10. It appears from the Affidavit that the applicant and respondent No. 2 - original complainant have arrived at compromise and the original complainant has no grievance against the applicant and the matter is amicably settled between the parties. 11. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is now resolved, the present application is allowed. The FIR being C.R No. I-36 of 2017 lodged with Sarthana Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under sections 366, 376, 506(2), etc. of the Indian Penal Code as well as all the consequential proceedings arising from the said FIR, are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicant only. Rule is made absolute accordingly. 12. Direct service is permitted.