The court may quash an FIR if continuation of proceedings would cause unnecessary hardship or abuse of process of law, especially when parties have amicably settled their disputes.

ORDER :

(J.C. DOSHI, J.)

1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “the Code”), the applicant seek quashing of the FIR registered as C.R.No.I-014 of 2020 registered (11196003200072) with Manjalpur Police Station, Vadodara for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 427, 465, 467, 468, 471, 441, 294(b), 506(2) and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and further proceedings arising thereof.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that first informant has compromised dispute with main accused Natvarbhai Babarbhai Solanki, pursuant to which in Criminal Misc. Application No.2882 of 2020, Co-ordinate Bench has quashed the FIR in question by passing order on 01.10.2024. He would submit that petitioner is power of attorney of Naginbhai and in capacity of power holder, he has filed Regular Civil Suit No.504 of 2019 before the learned Court, Vadodara and later on the suit is withdrawn. Therefore, he submits that looking to the chequred fact, putting the petitioner to trial would be futile exercise. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that petitioner on his own is willing to deposit Rs.25,000/- before the District Legal Services Authority, Vadodara within 7 days. Therefore, he submits to allow the petition.

3. Learned APP in the fact situation submitted to pass necessary orders.

4. I have heard learned advocates for the parties and perused record. It appears that FIR in question is filed against Natwarbhai Solanki and others regarding same transaction. On 01.10.2024, Co-ordinate Bench recorded settlement arrived between the parties and quashed the FIR. Para 3 to 6 of the said order reads as under :-

“[3] Both the learned advocates would submit that during the pendency of present petition, the matter is amicably settled amongst the parties and therefore, any further continuation of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would create hardship to the parties and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law.

[4] Learned APP has opposed the application and submitted that looking to averments made in the FIR, complaint may not be quashed.

[5] Learned advocate for the complainant confirmed about the settlement having been taken place and also confirmed the affidavit filed by the complainant. The said affidavit inter alia states the fact that the matter is amicably settled between the parties.

[6] Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts of settlement and law laid down by the Apex Court [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)], this Court is of the considered view that further continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR would nothing but unnecessary harassment to the parties and trial thereon would be futile and further continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Thus, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.”

5. The petitioner has filed additional affidavit, which is taken on record. It is stated as under :-

“1. I state that with regard to thel and i.e. Revenue Survey No.70 situated at Manjalpur, Vadodara, which is subject matter of the FIR being C.R.No.I-014 (Part -A) (11196003200072 of 2020) registered with Manjalpur Police Station, Vadodara City, I shall not claim any right, title or interest in future. I state that I am not in possession of the said land and I have not challenged the order of withdrawal of Regular Civil Suit No.504 of 2019 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara.”

6. In view of above, according