Quashed

Chiragbhai Prahaladbhai Makwana v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC4 Feb 2022CR.MA/3659/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court quashed an FIR under IPC and POCSO allegations of abduction and sexual assault where the appellant and the victim later married in 2019. The court found no fruitful purpose in proceeding with the complaint post-settlement.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Complaint/FIR No. C.R. No. I- 76 of 2018 and POCSO Case No. 110 of 2018 qua the applicant are quashed.

Chiragbhai Prahaladbhai Makwana Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gujarat HC (2022)

¶1

R/CR.MA/3659/2020 ORDER DATED: 04/02/2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 3659 of 2020

¶3

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

¶4

CHIRAGBHAI PRAHALADBHAI MAKWANA

¶5

Versus

¶6

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

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

¶8

MR VIJAY J SHAH(3487) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR JAYPRAKASH UMOT(3581) for the Respondent(s) No. 3 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MS MAITHILI D MEHTA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶9

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

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL

¶11

Date : 04/02/2022

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

Heard learned Advocate Shri Vijay Shah on behalf of the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Maithili D. Mehta on behalf of respondent no.1- State and learned Advocate Shri Jayprakash Umot on behalf of respondent no.3.

¶14

Though served none appears for respondent no.2.

¶15

Rule. Learned APP Ms. Mehta waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.1- State and learned Advocate Shri Jayprakash Umot waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.3.

¶16

The present application is preferred praying for quashing of FIR being C.R. No. I- 76 of 2018 registered on 30.07.2018 with Bavla Police Station District: Ahmedabad (Rural) for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ( POCSO) Act.

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

R/CR.MA/3659/2020 ORDER DATED: 04/02/2022

¶19

Learned Advocate Shri Shah on behalf of the applicant would submit that the complaint had been registered by father of respondent no.3 inter alia alleging that the applicant had enticed his minor daughter and had eloped with her. Learned Advocate Shri Shah would submit that at the time of registration of the complaint, both the applicant as well as the respondent no.3 were minors and whereas upon attaining the age of majority they had got married. The said marriage according to learned Advocate Shri Shah had been solemnized on 14.10.2019 and had been registered vide certificate dated 15.10.2019 by the Registrar of Marriages, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. Certificate to the said effect being annexed along with this application.

¶20

Learned Advocate Shri Shah would submit respondent no.3 i.e. the victim had been present before this Court on an earlier occasion and had confirmed before this Court the fact of marriage between the parties and the fact of affidavit filed by her. Such fact being noted vide order dated 18.02.2020. Learned Advocate Shri Shah therefore would request that the impugned complaint may be interfered with by this Court more particularly since no fruitful purpose would be served if the complaint is permitted to proceed further.

¶21

The submission of learned Advocate Shri Shah had been reiterated and supported by learned Advocate Shri Umot who would submit that the applicant and respondent no.3 are as of now living as husband and wife as having got married in the year 2019. Learned Advocate would submit that though the complainant being the father has not appeared but the primary fact of no offence as alleged in the complaint being made out may be considered by this Court.

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

R/CR.MA/3659/2020 ORDER DATED: 04/02/2022

¶24

Learned APP would submit that though serious allegations have been levelled since the parties have settled the matter more particularly applicant having married the prosecutrix, and the fact of love affair between the parties being evident from record this Court may pass appropriate orders.

¶25

Having regard to the submissions made by learned Advocates Shri Shah more considering the fact that the applicant and respondent no.3 have got married in the year 2019 and the marriage registration certificate having been placed on record, this Court is of he considered opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served if the complaint impugned is permitted to proceed further. This Court relies 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. I- 76 of 2018 registered on 30.07.2018 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 under Sections 3, 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act and POCSO Case No. 110 of 2018 pending before the learned Special Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) arising from the impugned complaint qua the applicant herein is quashed. Rule is made absolute to the above extent.

¶27

Direct service is permitted.

¶28

(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)

¶29

NIRU

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Chiragbhai Prahaladbhai Makwana v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chiragbhai Prahaladbhai Makwana 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

Salimbhai Hamidbhai Memon Vs State of Gujarat

Mohabatsinh Pragji Jadeja Vs State of Gujarat

Vijay Amrutbhai Thakor Vs State of Gujarat