AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ilesh J. Vora, J
Perused the Speaking to minutes filed by learned counsel for the applicant.
In order dated 16.02.2023 passed by this Court in the captioned application, name of Police Station is hereby corrected and now to be read as under:
“Dungra Police Station, Dist. Valsad.”
Rest of the order remains unaltered.
Note stands disposed of accordingly.
Mr. J.P. Shah, learned advocate states that he has instructions to appear for and on behalf of respondent no.2 and he will file his Vakalatnama in the Registry. Registry is directed to accept the same. Learned advocate for respondent no.2 has placed on record the affidavit, same is taken on record.
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 F.I.R. bearing II C.R.No. 155 of 2019 registered with Gungra Police Station, Dist.: Valsad for the offences mentioned therein and to quash all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicants.
Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned advocate for the respondent no.2 – complainant.
Both the learned advocates would submit that during the pendency of present petition, the matter is amicably settled amongst the parties and therefore, any further continuation of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would create hardship to the parties and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.
Learned APP has opposed the application and submitted that looking to averments made in the FIR, complaint may not be quashed.
The complainant – respondent No. 2 has filed affidavit stating inter-alia the fact that the matter is amicably settled with the applicant. The private respondent no.2 has confirmed the fact of settlement and contents of the affidavit in support of the petition.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts of settlement and law laid down by the Apex Court [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),] this Court is of the considered view that further continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR would nothing but unnecessary harassment to the parties and trial thereon would be futile and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Thus, 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 F.I.R. bearing II C.R.No. 155 of 2019 registered with Gungra Police Station, Dist.: Valsad filed against present applicant is hereby quashed and set aside and all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside. Direct service permitted.