Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/2693/2011 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 2693 of 2011
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
:
=======================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=======================================================
SATISH
RAMANBHAI SHAH & 2 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=======================================================
Appearance :
MR
ALPESH G DODIA for Applicant(s) : 1 - 3.
MR HL JANI APP for
Respondent(s) : 1,
MR PA BHATT for Respondent(s) :
2,
=======================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
Date
: 18/10/2011
ORAL
JUDGMENT
Rule.
Learned APP Mr.H.L. Jani for the respondent no.1-State and learned
counsel, Mr.P.A. Bhatt for the respondent no.2-original complainant
waive service of notice of rule.
The
present application has been filed by the applicant under Articles
14, 19, 226 and 227 of the Constitution
of India as well as under Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 for the prayer that FIR being
C.R.No.I-15/2011 registered with Ranip Police Station and the
chargesheet filed thereunder may be quashed and set aside on the
grounds mentioned in the application.
Heard
learned counsel, Mr.Alpesh Dodia for the applicant, learned A.P.P.,
Mr.H.L. Jani for the respondent no.1-State of Gujarat and learned
counsel, Mr.P.A. Bhatt for the respondent no.2.
Learned
counsel, Mr.Dodia for the applicant and learned counsel, Mr.Bhatt
for the respondent no.2 have stated that there is cross complaints
filed against each other and now they have arrived at amicable
settlement as it was a trivial dispute over a parking of a vehicle.
Learned counsel, Mr.Bhatt has also placed on record an affidavit of
the complainant. Both counsel, therefore, submitted that since the
dispute has been amicable settled, FIR and the chargesheet filed
thereunder may be quashed and set aside.
In
the facts and circumstances and considering the fact that the
dispute with regard to parking of a vehicle has not been amicably
settled between the parties, the present application deserves to be
allowed in light of the observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court
in a judgment in case of Madan Mohan Abbot V/s State of Punjab
reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582 that
the approach should be pragmatic based on ground realities.
In
the circumstances, the present application stands allowed in terms
of Para No.10(A). The impugned FIR being C.R.No.I-15/2011 registered
with Ranip Police Station and the chargesheet filed thereunder are
hereby quashed and set aside.
Rule
is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(RAJESH
H.SHUKLA, J.)
/patil
Top