Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI, J.
Rajubhai Chaganbhai Chovatiya - Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat - Respondent
R/Criminal Misc.Application No. 12716 of 2020
Decided on : 05-10-2020
Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) - Indian Penal Code - Sections 323, 504, 341 and 506(2) – Criminal Produce Code,1973 - Section 482 – Voluntarily causing hurt and Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace – Amicable settlement between parties - Seeking quash of FIR - There is amicable settlement arrived at between the complainant and the accused person by way of an affidavit, therefore, it would be futile exercise if the trial shall take place and the purpose of the same would not be served and therefore, it would be just and proper to quash the aforesaid FIR.
Facts of the case: Complainant who is doing work of priest of temple at Ghoghavadar Village was going to home of relative, on way complainant was stopped by Mr. Rajubhai - present applicant and said that, “why you had made complaint against me” and also using a language regarding to the caste of complainant and thereafter inflicted kick and fist blows to complainant inter-alia containing said fact complaint came to be lodged before Gondal Taluka Police Station - Present FIR is Counter Blast to earlier complaints made by present applicant against present complainant relating to encroachment.
Findings of the court: Punishment for offences under Section 323 is upto one year and under Section 504 punishment is upto two years, further under Section 506(2) punishment is up to 7 years and for offence under Atrocities Act, up to 5 years. But the offences are not so grave which invite the latest law of the land that whenever there is serious offences in that case High Court may not exercise discretion under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. but in the present case, the offences are less serious - By way of an Affidavit by the Respondent No.2 - Original Complainant, learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has submitted that now the cause does not survive and therefore the FIR may be quashed and set aside - This Court is inclined to exercise discretion in favour of applicant vested under Section 482 of Cr.PC.
Result: Application allowed
JUDGMENT :
ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI, J.
1. The Applicant has filed this Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the FIR being CR No. 11213016200814 of 2020 registered with Gondal Taluka Police Station, District - Rajkot (Rural) for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 341 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, with all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Sandip M. Patel for the applicant, learned APP Mr. H.K. Patel for the Respondent - State of Gujarat and learned advocate Ms. Avanika M. Panchal for the Respondent No. 2 - original complainant through video conference.
2.1 This application is filed with following prayers which read as under:
(A) Quashed and set aside the impugned FIR being C.R. No: 11213016200814 of 2020 registered with Gondal Taluka Police Station, District - Rajkot Annexure- A to this petition and all other consequential proceedings against the petitioner, and Pending admission and final disposal of this petition the Honourable Court may be pleased to stay the further proceedings of impugned FIR being C.R. No: 11213016200814 of 2020 registered with Gondal Taluka Police Station, District - Rajkot, Annexure- A to this petition”
Factual Matrix of the Case:
3. As per the case of prosecution on 13.08.2020 when the complainant who is doing work of priest of temple at Ghoghavadar Village was going to home of relative, on the way complainant was stopped by Mr. Rajubhai - the present applicant and said that, “why you had made complaint against me” and also using a language regarding to the caste of the complainant and thereafter inflicted kick and fist blows to the complainant inter-alia containing the said fact complaint came to be lodged before the Gondal Taluka Police Station.
3.1 It is further stated that the present FIR is the Counter Blast to the earlier complaints made by the present applicant against the present complainant relating to encroachment of Plot No. 47 to 69 of Ramod Road dated 30.07.2020. It is also stated that the present applicant and Sarpanch Bhavanaben had another application before the Collector on 04.08.2020 relating to cancellation of Trust as Shamaldasji leaving the cows freely and cows are eating the crops of nearby area and damaging other side Shamaldasji getting the fund from the public on the name and care for the Gaushalas.
4. Learned Advocate for the applicant has vehemently submitted that in the present case both the complainant and accused has settled the case and therefore no cause survives and for living peaceful life and forgive bitterness, they made compromise. He further submitted that amicable settlement is arrived at between the Complainant and the applicant Accused and the Affidavit to that effect is also placed on record. He further submitted that the applicant Accused has no serious antecedents and therefore, the discretion may be exercised by this Hon'ble Court and the Application may be allowed and FIR and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom may be quashed.
4.1 Learned advocate for the applicant has placed reliance upon four different authorities of Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Court, viz. (i) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Narender Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab and Another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, (ii) Iqbal Dawood Hala Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2013 (0) AIJEL-HC 229756, (iii) a judgment in case of Janki Chintan Shah Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2014 (0) AIJEL-HC 231973 and (iv) Arun Singh And Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Through Its Secretary And Another, reported in (2020) 3 Supreme Court Cases 736.
5. Per contra, learned APP Mr. Patel for the State has placed reliance upon the judgment delivered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dhruv Gurjar reported in 2019(0) AIJEL-SC 63692, wherein, it is he
SupremeToday
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
