1. Heard Mr. Rushabh R. Shah, learned advocate for the applicant, Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned APP for respondent No.1 – State and Mr. Krunal L. Shahi, learned advocate for respondent No.2.
2. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”), the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: “(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to quash and set aside the F.I.R. being registered with Rajkot Mahila Police Station, vide CR. No.II241/2012 on 04/11/2012 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506(2) of IPC and under Section 4 and 7 of Dowry Prohibition Act;
(B) Pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Rajkot Mahila Police Station, vide CR. No.II 241/2012 on 04/11/2012 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506(2) of IPC and under Section 4 and 7 of Dowry Prohibition Act;
(C) Such other and further relief/s that may be deemed just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be granted.”
3. It bornes out from the record of the application that applicant and respondent No.2 are husband and wife and that they have solemnized marriage under the Special Marriage Act before the Court in the year 2006 and stayed at Rajkot for sometime. It appears that respondent No.2 lodged FIR bearing CR No.II241 of 2012 registered with Mahila Police Station, Rajkot for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506(2) of IPC as well as Sections 4 and 7 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Respondent No.2 in the said FIR has levelled allegations which, in facts and circumstances of this case, does not require any elaborate discussion. Suffice it to say that there are allegations of harassment, demand of dowry and ill treatment by the applicant. It further transpires from the record of the application that at present respondent No.2 is staying at Rajkot at her parental house. It further appears from the order dated 12.12.2012 passed by this Court (Coram: K.M. Thaker, J.) that the present petition is filed for quashing of the aforesaid FIR under Section 482 of the Code, wherein respondent No.2 has also admitted at the time of admission and Mr. Shahi, learned advocate for respondent No.2 has also made a statement that an amicable settlement has been arrived at by the applicant – husband and respondent No.2 – wife. It was specifically contended before this Court that there is no fruitful purpose in continuing the proceedings related to the impugned FIR and chargesheet.
4. Today, Mr. Shahi, learned advocate for respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit which is taken on record. It is interalia stated in the affidavit that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and therefore, respondent No.2 has prayed that the FIR be quashed and set aside. It is averred in the affidavit that the applicant and respondent No.2 have entered into an agreement for customary divorce. However, no prayer is sought for and therefore, the said aspect is not dealt with by this Court in this application.
5. The applicant and respondent No.2 are present before this Court. Mr. Rushabh Shah, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. Krunal Shahi, learned advocate for respondent No.2 have identified their respective clients. The Court has also inquired from respondent No.2 in particular and she admits what is averred in the affidavit.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the facts stated hereinabove and as the parties who are 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 applicant would be unnecessarily harassment to the applicant 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.
9. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the FIR bearing CR No.II241 of 2012 registered with Mahila Police Station, Rajkot, filed by respondent No.2 against the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506(2) of IPC as well as Sections 4 and 7 of Dowry Prohibition Act 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.)