IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A.S. Oka and P.D. Naik, JJ.
Gyanraj Potiraj Nadar – Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Others – Respondents
Criminal Application No. 226 of 2016
Decided On : 07-04-2016
Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - Indian Penal Code, Section 363 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought quashing of an FIR registered under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging kidnapping. The victim, a minor at the time of the incident, had voluntarily married the accused, and both parties consented to quash the FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had amicably settled the dispute, the victim had attained majority and married the accused, and the offense under Section 363 of IPC was not made out. Citing Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the court held that quashing the FIR was justified due to the amicable settlement and the private nature of the dispute.
Issues: Quashing of FIR under Section 363 of IPC, amicable settlement, consent of parties, and the private nature of the dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the amicable settlement, the marriage of the victim and accused, and the private nature of the dispute, as well as the observations in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab regarding quashing criminal proceedings in cases of amicable settlement.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application and quashed the FIR registered under Section 363 of IPC.
P.D. Naik, J.
1. This is an application preferred by the Applicant under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Code') seeking quashing of, by consent, first information report ('FIR') dated 4th September 2015. The said FIR was registered with Dharavi Police Station vide CR No. 421 of 2015 under Section 363 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC') at the instance of Respondent no. 2. The Respondent no. 3 is the alleged victim of the alleged offence. She was minor at the time of alleged incident and the FIR was lodged at the instance of Respondent no. 2 who is her father.
2. Respondent no. 2 as well as Respondent no. 3 (who has presently attained the age of majority), have filed affidavits dated 3rd March 2016 and 1st April 2016 respectively before this Court stating that they have no objection for allowing the present application preferred by the Applicant for quashing the FIR bearing CR No. 421 of 2015 registered with Dharavi Police Station.
3. Brief facts, as alleged in the FIR, are as follows:
(a) The complainant is residing at the given address along with his family consisting of his wife, son and daughter namely Manjula (the victim). It is further stated that the complainant's daughter Manjula was studying in 12th standard in S.I.W.S. College at Wadala. She was in love with the Applicant accused who was residing in their area since last about one year. The complainant had repeatedly convinced the victim not to continue with the said relationship. However, the victim was repeatedly in contact with the Applicant accused.
(b) It is alleged that on 3rd September 2015 at about 5.30 p.m., the victim Manjula informed her mother that she is visiting her friend and left the house. She was found talking with the Applicant accused near Dr. Ambedkar College by the wife and son of the complainant. It is further stated that on seeing them, the victim and the Applicant ran away from the spot. The complainant and his family members then tried to search the victim, however, they did not succeed in tracing them in spite of enquiries with the persons from the area as well as their relatives. Hence, the complainant lodged the impugned FIR alleging that the victim girl is being kidnapped by the Applicant accused.
(c) On the basis of the information provided by Respondent no. 2, the FIR was registered with Dharavi Police Station as stated above on 4th September 2015.
4. The Applicant was arrested pursuant to the impugned FIR on 22nd February 2016 and he was produced before the concerned Court for remand. Thereafter, he was directed to be released on bail by the concerned Court vide order dated 23rd February 2016. In the present application it has been stated that the Applicant and Respondent no. 2 are known to each other since many years being neighbours and due to intervention of the respectable members of the society, they have arrived at an amicable settlement and Respondent no. 2 does not wish to proceed against the Applicant by pursuing impugned criminal proceedings.
5. The Respondent no. 2 original complainant, has filed an affidavit dated 3rd March 2016 in the present proceedings. In the said affidavit it has been stated that he has settled his grievance amicably with the Applicant accused and he is willing to withdraw the allegations made in the FIR. It is further stated that he is not willing to lead any evidence, whether oral or documentary, either before the Police or before the Court and in view of the amicable settlement, he is consenting to allow the prayers made in the application for quashing. He has further stated that he has no objection for allowing the application and for quashing the impugned FIR being CR No. 421 of 2015 registered with Dharavi Police Station. It is further stated that the Applicant is known to him and hails from his native place. As the Applicant accused has tendered unconditional apology and on account of intervention of respectable persons of his community and for the sake of bright future of the Appli
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.