High Court at Ahmedabad quashed a complaint under Sections 342, 344 IPC regarding custody dispute upon settlement between the grandfather parties. The FIR was set aside.
FIR being CR.No.I-65/2013 is quashed and set aside. Application stands allowed. Rule is made absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
R/CR.MA/9151/2013 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 9151 of 2013
==========================================================
MERUBHA @ DILAWARKHAN KESARKHAN RATHOD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NASIR SAIYED(6145) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR SIKANDER SAIYED(3458) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MOHSIN CHHALOTIYA(7579) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2 MR NIRAD D BUCH(4000) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2 MS CM SHAH, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI
Date : 12/12/2018
ORAL ORDER
Page 1 of 2
R/CR.MA/9151/2013 ORDER
by the Court. The copy of the said order is taken on record.
(BELA M. TRIVEDI, J)
Radhika Srinivasan
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR deserves to be quashed and set aside in view of the settlement between the parties regarding custody of the grand-daughter.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MERUBHA @ DILAWARKHAN KESARKHAN RATHOD
STATE OF GUJARAT
BELA. M. TRIVEDI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
