IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for judicious exercise of powers under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, the duty of the police to register an FIR only if a cognizable offence is made out, and the prohibition of abuse of process of law.

ORDER :

1. RULE returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel appearing for respective parties, present petition is taken up for final hearing today.

2. By way of present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being CR No.11202009212117 of 2021 registered with City ‘B’ Division Police Station, District Jamnagar for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 406, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”)

3. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present petition are as under:

3.1 The petitioner No.1 is the real brother of respondent No.2 – original complainant and petitioner No.2 is son of petitioner No.1 and nephew of respondent No.2 herein. That, three families of the brothers i.e. petitioner No.1, Mr. Vinodrai Kalyanjibhai Vasant (deceased) and respondent No.2 herein and their family members have been in a joint family business as fleet carriers, transporters etc. under various partnership firms and two private limited companies, which are still operational.

3.2] There arose a family dispute between the families of petitioner No.1, respondent No.2 and family members of deceased brother in the year 2017 resulting into filing of civil suits and complaints against each other. In the year 1995, several trucks were purchased in the individual names of family members of petitioners and complainant. Pursuant to the family dispute with regard to family properties and business, respondent No.2 herein earlier approached Superintendent of Police, Jamnagar by filing a written complaint, however the LCB Police, Jamnagar vide report dated 12.02.2020, opined that no offence was made out and hence, no FIR was registered.

3.3] Thereafter, the respondent No.2 herein again filed a complaint being Criminal Inquiry No.25/2021 making identical allegations seeking police investigation under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. However, considering the issue of delay and pending civil disputes between the parties, learned 4th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar vide order dated 07.06.2021 was pleased to reject the prayer of respondent No.2 for police investigation under Section 156(3) of the CrPC and directed respondent No.2 to remain present on 30.06.2021 for verification under Section 200 of the CrPC. The said order dated 07.06.2021 was assailed by the respondent No.2 herein before the Sessions Court, Jamnagar by way of filing Criminal Revision Application No.60/2021, which also came to be dismissed on 15.05.2022.

3.4] Further, respondent No.2 initiated proceedings under Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020 against the petitioners and upon considering the report of competent committee under the Gujarat Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2020 and pendency of civil suit with regard to the very property, the Deputy Collector, Jamnagar disposed of the application of respondent No.2 vide order dated 29.09.2021.

3.5] The respondent No.2 filed a purshis for withdrawal of Criminal Inquiry No.25/2021 which was accepted by the learned 4th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and Criminal Inquiry No.25/2021 was disposed of vide order dated 30.12.2021 and on the very next day i.e. on 31.12.2021, respondent No.2 herein filed the impugned FIR by suppressing the vital and important facts of pending litigation and orders passed by competent criminal court.

Hence, the present petition.

4. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Jal Unwala assisted by learned advocate Mr. D.V. Kansara for the petitioners, learned APP Mr. Manan Mehta for respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat and learned advocate Mr. H.P. Baxi for respondent No.2 – original complainant and also considered the written submissions filed on behalf of the petitioners as well as respondent No.2.

5. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Jal Unwala for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned FIR is nothing but an abuse of process of law as the alleged offence