The main legal point established in the judgment is the exercise of the extraordinary power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of the process of the court, especially in cases where the allegations do not constitute a cognizable offence and the dispute is of a civil nature.

ORDER :

1. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) for quashing the FIR bearing CR No.I-125/2016 registered with Chandkheda Police Station, Ahmedabad for offences punishable under Sections 447, 506(1), 380, 114 of the IPC and to terminate all the subsequent proceedings in connection with the FIR.

2. Mr. Desai, learned advocate for the applicant has made a prayer for quashing the FIR on the ground that there is no case in the impugned FIR to constitute any offence against the applicant and it is absolutely a civil transaction, where the present applicant and his wife had entered into a registered agreement of sale dated 7.10.2016 with Mr. Amit Doshi and Mrs. Seema Doshi, owner of the shop property, situated at Office no.1, Shri Balaji Complex, Motera, Ahmedabad. The total consideration of Rs.35,00,000/- was paid and before executing the agreement of sale, token amount of Rs.5,00,000/- was paid by the applicant by way of cheque and further the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was paid and on 24.10.2016, the possession agreement was executed between the applicant and vendor of the office. Mr. Desai submits that on 7.11.2016, the applicant had paid maintenance amount and light bill. A public notice was given in local Gujarati newspaper on 26.10.2016 inviting the objections towards issuance of title clearance certificate, while no objection was ever raised by any of the person and therefore, on 29.10.2016, the owner of the property – Mr. Amit Doshi and Mrs. Seema Doshi executed a registered sale deed in favour of the complainant. Mr. Desai submits that it would be now the issue of complainant, whether he is bonafide purchaser and whether he had any right, title or interest on the property. Mr. Desai submits that on 23.11.2016, the Suit for specific performance of the contract was filed before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar being Special Civil Suit no.218 of 2016 against the vendor and the subsequent purchaser who is complainant.

3. The impugned FIR dated 1.12.2016 is under the premise that on 22.11.2016, the applicant was at the office situated at Shri Balaji Complex and at that time, the complainant came to his office along with other persons and started quarreling with the applicant, at that time, by dialing 100, the police was called. Mr. Desai submits that the dispute was resolved and on the very same day, the applicant had given a complaint to the police officer who had come on the spot. Countering the allegations made in the FIR, Mr. Desai submits that the facts in the FIR do not suggest any illegal act or any criminality. The only fact, as could be culled out, is asking the complainant to leave the office property.

4. Special Civil Suit no.218 of 2016 was filed before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar. As per the record, the police had filed “A” summary on 19.11.2018 stating that the police could not find any corroboration of the allegations of trespass and theft. Therefore, on that ground, “A” summary was filed with a liberty to initiate further proceedings if at all any evidence would be found in future. The record suggests that the learned 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gandhinagar has accepted “A” summary with the liberty as prayed for.

5. Mr. Hardik Mehta, learned APP for the respondent–State submits that since “A” summary is filed and when liberty has been granted to the police of further investigation if needed, Mr. Mehta, learned APP submits that such liberty is required to be granted to the police even by order of this Court.

6. Para 232 of the Gujarat Police Manual gives power to the police to file final report when there is no sufficient evidence to justify the forwarding of the accused to a Magistrate and the police station officer or the Investigating Officer would release the accused person on bail, if he is in custody. The police station officer will then submit a a final report to th