AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rule. Mr. Rashesh Rindani, learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Mr.Japan V.Dave, learned advocate for
Mr.Hardik A.Dave, learned advocate for the respondent No.2 waives service of rule.
Mr. Japan V.Dave, learned advocate for Mr. Hardik A.Dave, learned advocate for respondent No.2 â€" original first informant places on record
one affidavit affirmed by first informant duly notarized whereby, he declared his wish not to proceed further with this impugned FIR as he has settled
the matter with the applicant outside the Court. He has also declared that he does not wish to continue any further with the aforesaid FIR and he has
no objection, if the impugned FIR filed against the applicant is quashed. Copy of affidavit is taken on record.
Since the offences as alleged against the applicant is under Sections 406, 420 and 506(2) of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and more particularly, when it
pertains to a rented flat, the rent which is partly paid and dispute remains to be of a part payment and possession thereof, if the impugned FIR is
quashed against the applicant, end of justice would be met.
Since the dispute between the parties appears to be very personal in nature, continuing the same would be a futile exercise when they settled the
dispute out of the Court and affidavit to that effect filed by the first informant.
Hence, the impugned FIR being C.R.No.I-147 of 2014 registered with Umra Police Station, District: Surat, for the alleged offences punishable
under Sections 406, 420 and 506(2) of IPC filed against the applicant, is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute.