Adam Suleman Padaya vs State Of Gujarat

Samir J. Dave, J

Learned advocate Mr.Jay Kishore Barot states that he has an instructions to appear for the respondent No.2 – original complainant. He is permitted to file his appearance forthwith.

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 respondent No.2 has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

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

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 C.R. No.11203038230125 of 2023 registered with Mangrol Police Station, Dist.-Junagadh for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 323, 506(2) & 114 of the IPC as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicant.

Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through factual matrix arising out of the present application. At the outset, it is submitted that 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 as well as victim have filed an affidavit in these proceedings and have declared that 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, 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.

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.

Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has placed on record the settlement Affidavit duly sworn by the original complainant as well as victim stating inter-alia the fact that the matter is amicably settled with the applicant, which is at Annexure-B & C to the petition. Learned advocate for respondent no.2 has also relied upon the Affidavits filed by the original complainant and the victim and submitted that now the grievance stands redressed, therefore, the present application may be allowed.

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective 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.

Resultantly, this application is allowed and the impugned FIR bearing C.R.No.11203038230125 of 2023 registered with Mangrol Police Station, Dist.-Junagadh and all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside qua the applicant. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.