Allowed

Bharatbhai Prahladbhai Prajapati v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC7 Oct 2020SCR.A/4029/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed a Special Criminal Application under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR. The Court held that since the dispute between the applicant and the complainant was resolved amicably, further criminal proceedings would be futile and amount to an abuse of process of law.

What did the court decide?

The impugned FIR bearing CR No.I-1121701920097 of 2020 and all other consequential proceedings qua the applicant are quashed and set aside.

Bharatbhai Prahladbhai Prajapati Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Gujarat HC (2020)

¶1

R/SCR.A/4029/2020 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4029 of 2020

¶4

==========================================================

¶5

BHARATBHAI PRAHLADBHAI PRAJAPATI

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶8

==========================================================

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

MR. HARDIK J JANI(6497) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR RD DAVE(264) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR.R.C.KODEKAR APP(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶11

==========================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

¶13

Date : 07/10/2020

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties through video conferencing.

¶16

Rule . Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

¶17

Considering the issue involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicant and original complainant – private respondent(s) has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

¶18

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 quashing and setting aside FIR bearing CR No.I-1121701920097 of 2020 registered with Patan City-A division Police Station, Dist.- Patan as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicant.

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

R/SCR.A/4029/2020 ORDER

¶21

Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application. At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the issue and therefore, any further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR as well as any further proceedings arising therefrom would create hardship to the applicant. It is submitted that respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit in these proceedings and has declared that the dispute between the applicant and respondent No.2 is resolved. It is further submitted that in view of the fact that the dispute is resolved, the trial would be futile and any further continuance of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. It is therefore submitted that this Court may exercise its inherent powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code and allow the application as prayed for.

¶22

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the present application and submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence, the complaint in question may not be quashed and the present application may be rejected.

¶23

Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has reiterated the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant. The learned advocate for respondent No.2 also relied upon the affidavits filed by respondent No.2-original complainant- Haresh Nanjibhai Chaudhary The complainant states that the matter is settled between the parties and also admits the contents of the Affidavit. Respondent No.2 is present in person in the chamber of learned advocate for the respondent No.2 and is identified by learned advocate for respondent No.2. It is therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed.

¶24

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

R/SCR.A/4029/2020 ORDER

¶27

parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application as well as taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases 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 & Anr. , reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors. , reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC) , it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicant would be unnecessary harassment to the applicant. It appears that the trial would be futile and further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.

¶28

Resultantly, this application is allowed and the impugned FIR bearing CR No.I-1121701920097 of 2020 registered with Patan CityA division Police Station, Dist.- Patan and all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside qua the applicant. Rule is made absolute.

¶29

Registry is directed to send writ of this order to the concerned Jail authority forthwith by fax or email.

¶30

(R.P.DHOLARIA, J)

¶31

cmk/manoj

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Bharatbhai Prahladbhai Prajapati v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharatbhai Prahladbhai Prajapati v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tejashkumar Babubhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat

Bhupatbhai Hathibhai Ghaghal Vs State of Gujarat

Magdum Usmanbhai Master Vs State of Gujarat

Sagar @ Techiyo Dashrathji Thakor Vs State of Gujarat

Krushnakumar @ Kalpesh Rambhai Karangiya Vs State of Gujarat

Jayeshbhai Babubhai Solanki Vs the State of Gujarat