Back
2020 Supreme(Guj) 612
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.P. Thaker, J.
Lataben Jiteshbhai Lathiya – Applicant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Criminal Misc. Application No. 10288 of 2020
Decided On : 19-08-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Mr Hardik A Dave
For the Respondent: Mr Pawan A Barot, Ms Maithili Mehta APP
Point of Law:
Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the Non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves.
Headnote:
Criminal law - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code - Section 307 - quashing - Applicant has submitted that FIR has been lodged against applicant who is a lady for attempting to murder of her own two children - He has submitted that on reading of FIR it would reflect that frustration applicant has administered poisonous substance to her two children as herself has consumed said substance and wanted to commit suicide - He has submitted that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between present applicant and respondent husband and wife there was a family dispute between them and due to that frustration applicant has committed alleged crime - He has submitted that as complainant himself has filed an affidavit request of quashing the FIR may be allowed in interest of justice - Respondent has supported version of applicant and has stated that complainant has no objection if present application is allowed and FIR filed against applicant be quashed and set aside - Held, -
Facts of the Case:
FIR has been lodged against the applicant, who is a lady, for attempting to murder of her own two children. He has submitted that on reading of the FIR, it would reflect that under frustration, the applicant has administered the poisonous substance to her two children as well as she herself has consumed the said substance and wanted to commit suicide. He has submitted that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the present applicant and respondent No.2 i.e. husband and wife, there was a family dispute between them and due to that under frustration, the applicant has committed the alleged crime. He has submitted that as the complainant himself has filed an affidavit, the request of quashing the FIR may be allowed in the interest of justice.
Finding of the Court:
Now considering factual aspects of case on account of family dispute and due to frustration prevailing upon applicant has committed alleged offence – Further in view of settlement between parties there is no chance of any conviction and therefore present application is required to be allowed - At this juncture it is pertinent to note that anxiety for welfare of applicant Additional Public Prosecutor has made a suggestion that applicant may avail benefit for her livelihood - In view of suggestion made by Additional Public Prosecutor for betterment of applicant some observation is required to be made in order for purpose of end of justice.
Result: Application allowed
ORDER :
1. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for quashing and setting aside the FIR being C.R. No. Part-A/112100042001003 of 2020 registered before Amroli Police Station, District : Surat for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard Mr.Hardik Dave, learned advocate for the applicant, Ms.Maithili Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 – State and Mr.Pawan Barot, learned advocate for respondent No.2 through Video Conferencing.
3. Mr.Hardik Dave, learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the FIR has been lodged against the applicant, who is a lady, for attempting to murder of her own two children. He has submitted that on reading of the FIR, it would reflect that under frustration, the applicant has administered the poisonous substance to her two children as well as she herself has consumed the said substance and wanted to commit suicide. He has submitted that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the present applicant and respondent No.2 i.e. husband and wife, there was a family dispute between them and due to that under frustration, the applicant has committed the alleged crime. He has submitted that as the complainant himself has filed an affidavit, the request of quashing the FIR may be allowed in the interest of justice.
3.1 Mr.Hardik Dave, learned advocate for the applicant has relied upon the following decisions.
1. The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296;
2. Safirbhai Musabhai Mover Vs. State of Gujarat dated 02.03.2020 rendered in Criminal Misc. Application No.4553 of 2020;
3. Akbarhusen Ahemadhusen Sheikh Vs. State of Gujarat dated 07.03.2018 rendered in Criminal Misc. Application No.5199 of 2018;
4. Abidshah Ahemadshah Sai and others Vs. State of Gujarat dated 29.06.2020 rendered in Criminal Misc. Application No.8112 of 2020;
5. Kapil Kanjibhai Vaja Vs. State of Gujarat dated 24.06.2020 rendered in Special Criminal Application No.2659 of 2020;
6. Alpesh Alias Appu Kanjibhai Bambhaniya Vs. State of Gujarat dated 04.03.2020 rendered in Criminal Misc. Application No.4755 of 2020;
7. Shravansing Bhursing Vaghela Vs. State of Gujarat dated 07.08.2020 rendered in Criminal Misc. Application No.10046 of 2020;
8. Dipak @ Dilip Shiavabhai Chavada Vs. State of Gujarat dated 06.08.2020 rendered in Criminal Misc. Application No.9805 of 2020;
4. Mr.Pawan Barot, learned advocate for respondent No.2 has supported the version of the applicant and has stated that the complainant has no objection if the present application is allowed and the FIR filed against the applicant be quashed and set aside. He has submitted that earlier there was dispute between the applicant and respondent No.2 and now, the said dispute has been settled between them and, therefore, the present application may be allowed.
5. Ms.Maithili Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 – State has submitted that the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is against the society at large and, therefore, even if the settlement has been arrived at between the accused and the complainant, the FIR may not be quashed. She has submitted that she has received the instructions from the concerned police personnel that there was settlement between the parties and the incident has happened due to severe frustration on the part of the applicant and she was not getting anything from the complainant due to that fact, she has tried to commit suicide and also administered poisonous substance to her two minor daughter. She has further submitted that if the Court comes to the conclusion that the application is required to be allowed, then, in that case, considering the narration and the mental state of the applicant that as she has no income and her husband was not paying any heed to her and due to that, under frustration, she has committed the alleged offence, the applicant may be advised to join the Sum
