Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
DIPANKAR DATTA, UJJAL BHUYAN
Shaileshbhai Ranchhodbhai Patel – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER :
1. By a common impugned judgment and order dated 14th September, 2011, a learned Judge of the High Court of Gujarat dismissed Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.5245 of 2003 (Shaileshbhai Ranchhodbhai Patel & Anr. v. State of Gujarat & Ors.) and Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 14383 of 2005 (Shainan Shaileshbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat & Anr.).
2. Criminal Appeal No.1884/2013 and Criminal Appeal No.1885 of 2013, by special leave, are at the instance of the complainant’s parents-in-law and husband, respectively, questioning such judgment and order whereby the learned Judge refused to quash FIR No.I-405/2022 dated 21st December, 2002 (FIR) under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at J.P. Road Police Station, Vadodara, Gujarat and consequently dismissed the petitions of the appellants under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(Cr. PC)
3. A bare reading of the impugned judgment and order reveals what primarily weighed with the learned Judge to refuse the prayer for quashing. The officer entrusted to investigate the FIR upon collection of materials
The court affirmed the High Court's authority to quash FIRs under Section 482 of the CrPC, even post charge-sheet, based on the nature of allegations and circumstances.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to quash FIRs under certain circumstances, such as when there is a settlement between the parties and a harmonious relationsh....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to quash an FIR should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases, as per the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court.
The court held that specific allegations of assault and trespass in the FIR constituted cognizable offences, thus not warranting quashing.
The power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 should be exercised sparingly, carefully, and with caution, and only when justified by the tests laid down in the section itself. Q....
The court established that inherent powers to quash FIRs under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised cautiously and only when no prima facie case exists.
The court held that an FIR cannot be quashed if it discloses cognizable offences, and allegations of mala fide do not suffice for quashing proceedings.
The court held that allegations in the FIR disclosed a prima facie case under Section 170 IPC, and quashing was not warranted at this stage.
The court held that allegations in the FIR constituted cognizable offences, including voyeurism and assault, and dismissed the petition to quash the FIR.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article