Allowed

Rohan Sanjaybhai Bharwad v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC9 Sept 2022CR.MA/14769/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Gujarat allowed an application for quashing of an FIR registered under IPC sections 323, 294(b), 506(1) and 14. The Court noted a settlement between parties, the complainant's consent, the applicants' youth, and an offer to donate money, deeming further trial futile.

What did the court decide?

First Information Report No.1191036220325 of 2022 is quashed and all consequent procedures thereof are quashed.

Rohan Sanjaybhai Bharwad Vs State of Gujarat — Quashing and FIR | Gujarat HC (2022)

¶1

R/CR.MA/14769/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 14769 of 2022

¶4

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

¶5

ROHAN SANJAYBHAI BHARWAD

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶8

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

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

MR HARSHIT R PUROHIT(8385) for the Applicants

¶11

MR NAIMESH PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Respondent No. 2 complainant MS MAITHILI MEHTA APP for the Respondent No.1 State

¶12

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

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI

¶14

Date : 09/09/2022

¶15

ORAL ORDER

¶16

1.1 With the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing. Hence, Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms.Maithili Mehta waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent – State whereas learned advocate Mr.Naimesh Patel waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.2 – original complainant.

¶17

1.2 Learned advocate Mr.Naimesh Patel sought permission of this Court to permit him to appear on behalf of original complainant viz. Hiteshbhai Ramanbhai Rajput, who is present in the Court. Permission is granted. He is to file his vakalatnama during the course of day. Registry is directed to accept the vakalatnama of learned advocate Mr.Patel who states that he will be

¶18

Page 1 of 5

¶19

R/CR.MA/14769/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2022

¶20

filing his vakalatnama during the course of the day.

¶21

By way of this application, the applicants have prayed for quashing the First Information Report being No.1191036220325 of 2022 filed by the complainant against the applicant registered with Navrangpura Police Station under sections 323, 294(b), 506(1) and 14 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Both the learned advocates Mr.Purohit for the applicants as well as Mr.Patel for original complainant jointly state that the impugned FIR registered on 28.07.2022 being First Information Report being No.1191036220325 of 2022 before Navrangpura Police Station under sections 323, 294(b), 506(1) and 14 of the Indian Penal Code by the complainant alleging that his son was beaten and threatened by the present applicants. However, thereafter the issue is settled between the parties and an affidavit dtd.03.08.2022 also filed by the complainant viz. Hiteshbhai Ramanbhai Rajput and, therefore, considering the fact that age of applicants is around 21 years, the settlement between the applicants and complainant may be considered and FIR be quashed.

¶23

Learned advocate Mr.Harshit Purohit for the applicants states that each of the applicant is ready and willing to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- each to the Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Law Library if this Court considers

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

R/CR.MA/14769/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2022

¶26

the request of quashing of the complaint.

¶27

In view of settlement as well as taking note of the fact that the applicants are in their early twenties and one of the applicants is teenager and considering the offer that each of the applicant shall donate a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Law Library, this Court was inclined to hear the matter.

¶28

Learned advocate Mr.Patel states that the complainant viz. Hiteshbhai Ramanbhai Rajput is present in the Court and he has been identified by learned advocate Mr.Naimesh Patel. Upon inquiry from the Court, the complainant viz. Hiteshbhai Ramanbhai Rajput states that in view of settlement arrived at between the parties, he does not have any objection if the impugned FIR is quashed.

¶29

Considering the fact that the applicants are in their early twenties and one of the applicants is teenager as well as the applicants have offered to donate a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Law Library and considering the fact that the issue has been settled between the parties and complainant does not have any objection if the FIR is quashed, if the applicants are relegated to face the trial that would not yield and result and that would amount to futile exercise.

¶30

Page 3 of 5

¶31

R/CR.MA/14769/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2022

¶32

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present case 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) 6 SCC 466 , it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicants would be unnecessary harassment to the applicants. 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 Court 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.

¶33

For the reasons above and in view of the consent of the complainant, who is present before the Court, who confirms orally as well as by way of an affidavit that the dispute is settled between the parties and he does not have any objection if the FIR is quashed, no fruitful

¶34

Page 4 of 5

¶35

R/CR.MA/14769/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2022

¶36

purpose would be served in continuing further with the proceedings. Therefore, the present application is required to be allowed and it is accordingly allowed. Amount of Rs.5,000/- each, as offered by the applicants, to be deposited in the Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Law Library within period of one week from today and only thereafter the copy of the writ may be made available to the applicants.

¶37

Resultantly the First Information Report being No.1191036220325 of 2022 filed by the complainant against the applicants registered with Navrangpura Police Station is hereby quashed and all consequent procedures thereof are hereby quashed accordingly.

¶38

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs. Direct service is permitted.

¶39

(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)

¶40

MISHRA AMIT V.

¶41

Page 5 of 5

Rohan Sanjaybhai Bharwad v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohan Sanjaybhai Bharwad 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

M/S Samkit Infracon Vs Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority

M/S Samkit Infracon Vs Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority

M/S Samkit Infracon Vs Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority

Sarfaraz @ Kitli Ismailbhai Shaikh Vs State of Gujarat

Rajeshkumar Umiyashanker Mehta Vs State of Gujarat

Mohammed Tufel @ Maujar Ilyasbhai Noormohammed Shaikh Vs State of Gujarat