1. Mr. Parthiv Bhatt, learned advocate for the applicants seeks permission to amend the sections which are mentioned in the title of the petition. Permission granted.
2. Heard Mr. Parthiv Bhatt, learned advocate for the applicants, Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned APP for respondent No.1 and Mr. Tejas Shukla, learned advocate for respondent No.2.
3. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”), the applicants have prayed for the following reliefs: “A That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to as the impugned FIR bearing No. I 315/12 registered with Vejalpur Police Station, Ahmedabad, against the petitioners.
B That pending hearing and final disposal of this present petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay further proceedings of FIR bearing No. I 315/12 registered with Vejalpur Police Station, Ahmedabad, against the petitioners.
C That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant an exparte adinterim relief in terms of para 4(B).
D Any other and further relief as may be deem fit in the interest of justice may kindly be granted.”
4. Relevant facts for the purpose of this application are enumerated as under:
4.1 Applicant No.1 married to respondent No.2 on 16.10.2012. Applicant No.2 is the father of applicant No.1 and father in law of respondent No.2, applicant No.3 is mother of applicant No.1 and mother in law of respondent No.2 and applicant Nos.4 and 5 are sisters of applicant and sisters in law of respondent No.2.
4.2 As averred in the application that immediately after the marriage, applicant No.2 and other applicants abused respondent No.2 in relation to some domestic work and also demanded dowry because of which respondent No.2 had to leave the matrimonial house on 8.11.2012. It appears that because of such incident, respondent No.2 lodged FIR bearing CR No. I315 of
5. It is pertinent to note that by this application, the applicants have prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned FIR as the applicants and respondent No.2 have amicably settled the issue. This Court (Coram: K.M. Thaker, J.) has passed the detailed order at the time of admission which reveals that respondent No.2 has expressed in no uncertain terms that the parties have settled the issue and in fact they are staying as husband and wife at the premises of applicant No.1. It was specifically contended before this Court that there is no fruitful purpose in continuing the proceedings related to the impugned FIR and chargesheet.
6. Mr. Shukla has also specifically invited attention of this Court to the affidavit dated 10.12.2012 and has submitted that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and therefore, this Court may be pleased to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code by quashing and setting aside the impugned FIR as no useful purpose would be served in prosecuting the impugned FIR any further and on the contrary, it may create hurdles in the life of applicant No.1 and respondent No.2 who are living a happy married life today.
7. Mr. Bhatt, learned advocate for the applicants as well as Mr. Shukla, learned advocate for respondent No.2 have jointly submitted that applicant No.1 and respondent No.2 are present in the Court. Both the learned advocates have identified applicant No.1 and respondent No.2 who are present in the Court. This Court has specifically inquired from respondent No.2 as regards the compromise/settlement arrived at. Respondent No.2 has expressed in no uncertain terms that the dispute has been settled.
8. Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned APP for respondent No.1 candidly submitted that in view of the affidavit filed by respondent No.2, the first informant who has also stated the same thing before the Court, the Court may exercise its powers under Section 482 of the Code and pass appropriate order.
9. Learned advocates appearing for the respective parties have relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 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 and Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31 and Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190.
10. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the facts stated hereinabove and as the husband and wife have amicably settled the dispute and the dispute seems to be private in nature and considering the aforesaid decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it appears that the criminal proceedings against the applicants would be unnecessarily harassment to the applicants and the same shall not be in the interest of parties and therefore, the impugned FIR deserves to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code.
11. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the FIR bearing CR No.I315 of 2012 registered with Vejalpur Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 506(2), 504, 323 and 114 of the IPC is hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, the proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also terminated. Accordingly, this application is allowed in the above terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
mrpandya (R.M.CHHAYA, J.)