Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 2950
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI, J
MILANKUMAR @ NISHCHINT MANUBHAI PATEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 4107 of 2025
The court can quash an FIR under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent abuse of process when parties have amicably settled their dispute.
Headnote:(A) BNSS, 2023 - Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(3), 352 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - Parties amicably settled the dispute, and the complainant affirmed the settlement in an affidavit - Continuation of proceedings would cause unnecessary harassment and abuse of process of law. (Paras 5, 7, 8)
(B) Criminal Procedure - The court has the power to quash FIRs to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice. (Paras 8)
Facts of the case:
The original complainant affirmed the amicable settlement with the petitioners, stating there was nothing left to proceed against them. The affidavit confirmed the settlement and the transfer of properties.
Findings of Court:
The court found that continuing the proceedings would be futile and cause unnecessary harassment.
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR should be quashed based on the amicable settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of process of law, thus justifying the quashing of the FIR.
Result: Petition allowed; FIR quashed.
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.
[2] Learned advocate Mr.Yash Gupta confirms identity of respondent No.2 – original complainant, who is present in the Court and admits correctness and genuineness of the affidavit filed by the complainant. Said affidavit is taken on record. The first informant is made aware about the contents of the affidavit in vernacular language.
[3] Learned APP objects quashment of present proceedings on the premise of settlement.
[4] With the consent of learned advocate for the petitioners and learned advocate for the respondents, present petition is taken up for final disposal today. The parties are present before the Court alongwith their respective learned advocates.
[5] By way of the present applications under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (Section 482 of Criminal Procedure, 1973), the petitioners pray for quashing and setting aside the FIR registered with Vidhyanagar Police Station, Anand vide C. R. No. 11215037250091 of 2025 for the offences punishable u/s 316(2), 318(4), 351(3) and 352 of BNS, 2023.
[6] Learned advocate for the petitioners has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application.
[7] At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute. In support of such submission made at bar by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, they have placed on record affidavit of settlement of dispute duly signed by the respondent No.2 – original complainant, who is present before the Court. Relevant paragraph of the affidavit reads thus:
“I, Kalpeshkumar Kantilal Patel, Age: 47 yrs, Male, residing at Dalukhadiya, Patel Faliya, Tal. Lunawada, Dist. Mahisagar, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under; 1.. I respectfully state that I have lodged impugned FIR against the petitioners herein registered with Vidhyanagar Police Station, Anand vide C. R. No. 11215037250091 of 2025 for the offences punishable u/s 316(2), 318(4), 351(3) and 352 of BNS, 2023.
2. I further state that I have amicably settled the dispute with the petitioners and there is nothing left between us to proceed against the petitioners and therefore, the present petition may be allowed and the impugned FIR may be quashed and set aside.
3. I submit that the petitioner and I have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding and according to MOU the petitioner has already transferred two houses in favour of my father after clearing mortgage on the said one of the properties. By way of this settlement I have already received my full misappropriated amount therefore as on today there is nothing left to proceed further against the petitioner. To proceed further against the petitioner would be nothing but mental agony and pain to us. Therefore, the FIR may be quashed and set aside to which I do not have any objection.
4. This affidavit has been sworn in by me without any force, coercion, inducement or pressure and with full consciousness of mind.”
[8] Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present petition 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) as well as State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the petitioners would be unnecessary harassment to the petitioners. 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 he
