Mukeshbhai Ishwarbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat

Rule. Mr.Rashesh Rindani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State. Mr.Kamlesh S. Kotai, learned advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent No.2.

By way of this application, the applicants have prayed for following prayer:

"Your Lordship be pleased to quashed and set aside First Information Report, the offence registered as C.R.No. I-128/2013 on dated 09.10.2013 with Adalaj Police Station, Dist-Gandhinagar (Annexure-A) in the interest of justice."

Considering the issue involved and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicants and the first informant as also the injured persons of the mishap in question, has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal.

Mr.Vijay Nangesh, learned advocate for the applicants submits that not only the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased are paid appropriate compensation but each of the injured persons are paid appropriate compensation. Mr.Kamlesh Kotai, learned advocate for the respondent No.2 also supports the same that appropriate amount of compensation is also paid to all the injured persons of this mishap and whose affidavits are also filed along with the petition and a copy of vouchers evidencing the payment made to them, is also on record.

The applicants have prayed for quashing of the FIR filed against them bearing C.R.No. I-128 of 2013 registered with Adalaj Police Station, District:Gandhinagar for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 304, 337 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned advocate for the applicants has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application. At the outset, it is submitted that, the parties have amicably resolved the issue and therefore, continuance of the proceedings any further pursuant to the impugned FIR as well as any further proceedings arising therefrom, would create hardship to the applicants. The injured persons have filed an affidavit in these proceedings and has declared that the dispute between the applicants and injured persons is resolved due to intervention of the trusted persons of the society. It is further submitted that in view of the fact that the dispute is resolved, the 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.

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 applicants would be unnecessary harassment to the applicants. 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 of conferred under Section 482 of the Code.

Prima-facie, there may be a possibility of slab having fallen down because of heavy rain and therefore, the incident does not attract Provisions of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, in which one person has lost his life. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, it is duly submitted by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties that the dispute has amicably settled between the parties. Today, the first informant is not present.

Though, the first informant is not present in the Court, learned advocate Mr.Kamlesh Kotai submits that the first informant and other heirs have filed their affidavits and they do not want to continue with the proceedings. Even the Head Constable Mr.Mahendrasinh Setansinh, Buckle No.1299, Adalaj Police Station is present in the Court with the papers of investigation, which reveals that in view of settlement, First Informant and witnesses do not wish to continue proceedings further.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has looked into the papers of investigation and there also, it appears that the statements of the witnesses after their affidavits were also taken on record during the course of investigation reveals the same. Prima-facie, it appears that all the injured and the relatives of deceased have resolved the dispute amicably and not interested in proceeding with the FIR any further. Mr.Vijay Nangesh, learned advocate for the applicants states that the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased have been paid Rs.7,30,000/- as compensation to which learned advocate Mr.Kotai is not able to dispute. At the same time, all the injured witnesses in the case have also been paid amount ranging from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.30,000/- each, for their injury, as revealed from the papers.

In view thereof, the First Information Report bearing C.R.No. I-128 of 2013 registered with Adalaj Police Station, District:Gandhinagar, is quashed and set aside along with any further proceedings thereto, if any. The present application is allowed. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.