When parties have amicably settled their differences, further continuation of criminal proceedings would be unnecessary harassment and an abuse of process of law, justifying the quashing of the FIR and consequential proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr.Majmudar for the applicant, learned Advocate Mr.Nirad Buch for the org. complainant - respondent No.2 and Mr.Ronak Raval, learned APP for respondent-State. Respondent No.2 is present before the Court and has been verified by the learned Counsel representing.

2. Considering the issue involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicants and respondent No.2 has been resolved amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

3. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ”the Code”), the applicants have prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR being C.R.No.I-251 of 2016 registered with Raopura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 294(B), 354 and 506(2) of Indian Penal Code as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the applicant herein.

4. Learned counsel for the respective parties submitted that during pendency of the criminal proceedings, as referred to above, the parties have amicably settled their differences by way of mutual settlement and pursuant to understanding arrived at between them, the Respondent has accordingly filed an affidavit dated 10.08.2023, which is on record. Respondent No.2 is identified by learned Advocate Mr.Nirad Buch who also confirms the contents of the affidavit filed by the respondent No.2; to which there is no dispute between the parties. Relevant paragraph of the said affidavit reads thus:

“3. I say that during the pendency of the captioned petition, a mutual consensus has been arrived at between the parties after several deliberations and honest and serious efforts of leading members of the society of both the sides, and therefore, there is no chance of backing out from the same.

4. In view of the above, I respectfully submit that I do not have any objection if the Hon’ble Court is pleased to quash the FIR and proceedings arising there from and / or incidental thereto against the applicant herein.

5. I declare that this affidavit is filed on my own volition and without any external or internal force, coercion, intimidation or otherwise.”

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present applications as well as taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicants would be unnecessary harassment to the applicants. It appears that the trial would be futile and further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law and Court and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR and other consequential proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.

6. Resultantly, this application is allowed. The impugned FIR being C.R.No.I-251 of 2016 registered with Raopura Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 294(B), 354 and 506(2) of Indian Penal Code filed against the present applicants is hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute.