Gujarat High Court High Court

========================================= vs Unknown on 18 October, 2011

Gujarat High Court
========================================= vs Unknown on 18 October, 2011
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/14322/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 14322 of 2011
 

 
=========================================
 

ANILBHAI
MANSINGBHAI RATHOD @ MAMA 

 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 

 

========================================= 
Appearance
: 
MR KIRTIDEV R DAVE for
Applicant
 

MR
RAHUL K DAVE for Applicant 
MR HL JANI APP for Respondent No.1 
MR
HARDIK A DAVE for Respondent
No.2 
=========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

Date
: 18/10/2011 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

[1] RULE.

Learned APP Mr.H. L. Jani waives service of rule for the respondent
No.1 – State and learned advocate Mr.Hardik A. Dave for the
respondent No.2 – original complainant.

[2] The
present application has been filed by the applicant under Section 482
of the Criminal Procedure Code for the prayer that the FIR being
C.R.No.I-207/2011 registered with Malaviyanagar Police Station,
Rajkot for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the
Indian Penal Code may be quashed and set aside, on the grounds stated
in the application.

[3] Heard
learned advocate Mr.K. R. Dave for the applicant, learned APP Mr.H.
L. Jani for the respondent No.1 – State and learned advocate
Mr.Hardik A. Dave for the respondent No.2 – original
complainant.

[4] Learned
advocate for the applicant and learned advocate for the respondent
No.2 have stated that the parties have amicably settled the dispute
for which the affidavit is also filed by the complainant – respondent
No.2 at Annexure – “B”. Therefore, the learned advocates
have stated that the present application may be allowed. Learned
advocate Mr.Hardik A. Dave for the respondent No.2 has no objection
if the complaint is quashed.

[5] As
the parties have amicably settled the dispute for which the affidavit
is also filed, the present application deserves to be allowed, in
view of the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of Madan Mohan Abbot V/s State of
Punjab reported in (2008)
4 SCC 582 and
in the case of Ramgopal V/s
State of M.P., reported
in
2010 (13) SCC 540
wherein it has been observed that when the
dispute is of purely a personal nature and the parties have settled,
the criminal complaint can be quashed and set aside.

[6] In
the circumstances, the present application deserves to be allowed and
accordingly stands allowed. The prayer in terms of paragraph No.12(b)
is granted. The FIR being C.R.No.I-207/2011 registered with
Malaviyanagar Police Station, Rajkot is hereby quashed and set aside.
Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.

[
RAJESH H. SHUKLA, J. ]

vijay

   

Top