AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.G. Uraizee, J.—I have heard Mr. A.P. Shah, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, Mr. Niraj Soni, learned APP appearing for respondent No. 1 State and Mr. R.K. Savjani, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2. The present application is filed to challenge the proceedings initiated by respondent No. 2 u/s 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the applicant for the custody of Solanki Jasodaben Ratilal, who is the daughter of the applicant. It appears from the order dated 17/7/2009 that said Jasodaben was produced before this Court and her wish was ascertained in the chamber. She stated that she was willingly residing with her parents and was not unlawfully confined as alleged in the complaint.
Mr. R.K. Savjani, learned counsel for respondent No. 2, at whose instance proceedings u/s 97 of the Code were initiated, has stated that in view of the statement made by Solanki Jasodaben Ratilal before this Court on 17/7/2009, he does not propose to further prosecute his complaint and he has no objection if the complaint Annexure - "A" being Criminal Misc. Application No. 118/2009 pending before the Court of learned J.M.F.C. Khambhaliya is quashed and set aside.
The dispute involved in this petition is essentially between the two private individuals and the society at large is not affected by the criminal complaint filed by respondent No. 2. As Jasodaben Solanki has stated on her own volition before this Court that she was residing with her parents and was not unlawfully confined, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has rightly conceded before this Court that nothing remains in the complaint initiated by respondent No. 2. The Honourable Supreme Court has also in recent judgements i.e. in case of (i) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, (ii) Jitendra Raghuvanshi and Others Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi and Another, has expounded the proposition that if the dispute is essentially between two individuals and society at large is not affected by the criminal complaint and when the parties have amicably settled their disputes/differences, it would be fruitless to allow the criminal proceedings to continue, which would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, considering the totality of the facts of the present case, the present application deserves to be accepted. Accordingly, it is hereby allowed. Criminal Misc. Application No. 118/2009 pending before the Court of J.M.F.C., Khambhaliya is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute. No costs.