1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr.P.M.Thakkar with learned advocate Mr.S.H.Bhatt for the applicants and Mr.K.P.Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.1-State and Mr.A.H.Mehta, learned advocate for the respondent no.2.
2. I have also taken into consideration the disputed F.I.R. sought to be quashed at Page No.17-A filed by the respondent no.2 herein as well as the F.I.R. filed by the daughter of the petitiner no.1 at Page No.25-A and other relevant documents viz. the application filed by the respondent no.2 to P.I., Vadgam Police Station, Annexure-I, dated 03.05.2010 and the copies of subsequent applications filed by the respondent no.2 herein to the Police Officers, so also affidavit-in- reply of the respondent no.2.
behalf of both the sides, so also considering the materials placed on record, this Court is of the opinion that the matter requires consideration and detailed examination and hence RULE returnable on 04.05.2012.
4. Mr.A.H.Mehta, learned advocate for the respondent no.2 waives service of Rule for the respondent no.2 and Mr.K.P.Raval, learned Additoinal Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.1-State waives service of Rule for the respondent no.1-State.
5. Vide initial order dated 29.07.2010, Ad-interim relief in terms of Para-8(b) was granted, but the same was modified vide order dated 06.12.2010, to the extent that the investigation of the impugned F.I.R./Complaint may go on but, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants. The said order dated 06.12.2010 shall continue.
(J.C.UPADHYAYA,J.) Girish