Quashed

Vijay Amrutbhai Thakor v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC4 Feb 2022CR.MA/23774/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gujarat High Court quashed an FIR and POCSO case after the applicant married the prosecutrix-victim and the complainant settled the dispute, relying on Supreme Court precedents regarding quashing under Section 482 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Complaint and POCSO Case were quashed; Rule made absolute.

What the court decided

Vijay Amrutbhai Thakor Vs State of Gujarat — Quashing and FIR | Gujarat HC (2022)

¶1

R/CR.MA/23774/2019 ORDER DATED: 04/02/2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 23774 of 2019

¶3

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

¶4

VIJAY AMRUTBHAI THAKOR

¶5

Versus

¶6

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

======================================================== Appearance:

¶8

MS LAKSHA BHAVNANI FOR SHAILESH R THAKORE(9310) for the Applicant(s) No. 1

¶9

MS. S.P. JOSHI FOR MR RONAK R SIRSIKAR(10511) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 MS MAITHILI D MEHTA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

¶12

Date : 04/02/2022

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

Heard learned Advocate Ms. Laksha Bhavnani for learned Advocate Shri Shailesh Thakore on behalf of the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Maithili D. Mehta on behalf of respondent no.1- State and learned Advocate Ms. S.P. Joshi for learned Advocate Shri Ronak Sirsikar on behalf of respondent no.2- original complainant.

¶15

Rule. Learned APP Ms. Mehta waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.1- State and learned Advocate Ms. S.P. Joshi waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.2- original complainant.

¶16

By way of this application the applicant had prayed for quashing of FIR being C.R. No. I-1- 76 of 2019 registered with Bavla Police Station District Ahmedabad (Rural) for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and for the offence punishable unde Sections 4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ( POCSO) Act.

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

R/CR.MA/23774/2019 ORDER DATED: 04/02/2022

¶19

Learned Advocate Ms. Bhavnani and learned Advocate Ms. Joshi would jointly submit that the complaint had been filed by respondent no. 2 in context of the daughter of the complainant having eloped with the applicant at that relevant point of time. Learned Advocates would further submit that after filing of the complaint, since it appears that the parties have settled the matter inter se more particularly the applicant having married with daughter of the complainant, the parties would jointly request that this Court may quash the impugned complaint.

¶20

Learned Advocate Ms. Joshi would submit that the complainant had remained present before this Court and she had admitted to genuineness and correctness of affidavit preferred by her which is noted vide order dated 23.12.2019. Learned Advocate would submit that even the affidavit of the prosecutrix -victim has also been preferred. Learned Advocate would therefore submit that since the victim and the applicant have got married, and since the complainant has also settled the issue, the impugned complaint may be quashed by this Court.

¶21

Learned Advocate Ms. Bhavnani would submit that the fact of the applicant and the prosecutrix – victim having married and confirmed by certificate of registration of marriage which learned Advocate had tendered and whereas it would be seen that the parties have got married on 22.12.2021 such certificate is directed to be taken on record.

¶22

Learned APP Ms. Mehta would submit that though serious allegations have been levelled since the dispute being personal and since the applicant and daughter of the complainant have got married this Court may pass appropriate orders.

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

R/CR.MA/23774/2019 ORDER DATED: 04/02/2022

¶25

Having regard to the submissions made by learned Advocates for the parties and having perused the documents and having appreciated the fact of the applicant and daughter of the complainant having got married, this Court is of the considered opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served, if the impugned complaint is permitted to proceed any further. This Court has relied upon the observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court 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 , 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) to arrive at the above conclusion.

¶26

Having regard to the above discussions, the Criminal Complaint being FIR No. C.R. No. -1- 76 of 2019 registered on 12.08.2019 with Bavla Police Station, Ahmedabad (Rural) for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act and POCSO Case No. 90 of 2019 pending before the learned Additional District Judge and Special Judge (POCSO Court), Ahmedabad Rural arising from the impugned complaint qua the applicant are quashed. Rule is made absolute.

¶27

Direct service is permitted.

¶28

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)

¶29

NIRU

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Vijay Amrutbhai Thakor v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Vijay Amrutbhai Thakor 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

Vinod Punamchand Daga Vs State of Gujarat

Vicky Jayeshkumar Brahmbhatt Vs State of Gujarat

Rajubhai Bhopabhai Chavda Vs State of Gujarat

Chiragbhai Prahaladbhai Makwana Vs State of Gujarat

Salimbhai Hamidbhai Memon Vs State of Gujarat

Mohabatsinh Pragji Jadeja Vs State of Gujarat