Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Dipakbhai vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|11 May, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1 Rule.
Service is waived. Upon joint request made by the learned advocates for the parties, this matter is taken up for final disposal.
2 This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [for short, 'the Code'] is filed by the applicants to quash the FIR being C.R. No.I-362 of 2011 registered with Fatehganj Police Station, Vadodara, for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
3 In the backdrop of the dispute arising out of the complaint for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, now, the dispute is settled between the parties as per consent terms/compromise purshis dated 9.5.2012 signed by the parties before the Notary and they have agreed to act in accordance with the said consent terms/compromise purshis dated 9.5.2012, by which, the complainant and the applicants agreed to withdraw all proceedings, civil and criminal, against each other. In addition to the above, additional affidavit dated 10.5.2012 is also filed by the complainant adhering to and re-affirming the consent terms/compromise purshis dated 9.5.2012 and that she has no objection if the complaint impugned is quashed and set aside. Therefore, it is jointly prayed that interest of justice would be served if the impugned complaint is quashed by this Court. Copies the consent terms/compromise purshis dated 9.5.2012 and the additional affidavit dated 10.5.2012 are ordered to be taken on record.
5 Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that, as per the consent terms/compromise purshis dated 9.5.2012 and the additional affidavit dated 10.5.2012, the dispute is settled between the parties and considering the law laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675, and Nikhil Merchant vs. CBI, reported in (2008) 9 SCC 677, in my view, relegating the applicants to undergo the rigors of trial is not just and proper.
Hence, a case is made out to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code to secure ends of justice and, accordingly, the impugned complaint is quashed and set aside. The consent terms/compromise purshis dated 9.5.2012 and the additional affidavit dated 10.5.2012 and the terms and conditions contained therein shall form part of this order and the parties are directed to act and abide by the said terms and conditions. The application is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(ANANT S. DAVE, J.) (swamy) Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Dipakbhai vs State

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
11 May, 2012