IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 20543 of 2023 ==========================================================

CHANDRAKANT MULJIBHAI VAGHELA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR PRATEEK S BHATIA(8629) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR KRISHNAN M GHAVARIYA(8133) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR KRUNAL G PATEL(8525) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR CHINTAN DAVE, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 18/01/2024

ORAL ORDER

[1.0] By way of present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

“(b) Your Lordships may be pleased to quash and set aside the First Information Report No.I/11191024230814 of 2023 dated 23.07.2023 registered with Ramol Police Station, Ahmedabad and Charge-sheet having its number as 245 of 2023 dated 25.09.2023 (Annexure-A) i.e. Criminal Case No.15202/2023;

[2.0] Present quashing petition is filed on the ground of settlement between the parties and respondent No.2 – complainant has filed an afÏadvit at Annexure-B afÏrming the fact of settlement.

[3.0] Upon issuance of Rule by the coordinate Bench, learned advocates for respondents appeared and with the consent of learned advocates appearing for respective parties, present application is taken up for final hearing today.

[4.0] Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

[5.0] Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the incident took place in spur of moment and present petitioner and respondent No.2 both having consensual relationship and both are living in live-in relationship and both have settled the dispute. Even, due to hostility of witnesses and if the complainant does not support the case of prosecution then it would be a futile exercise on the part of the learned trial Court and it will waste precious time of the Court. Hence, he requested to allow the present application.

[6.0] Learned advocate Mr. Krishnan Ghavariya for respondent No.2 has submitted that the complainant has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed and set aside.

[7.0] Learned APP for respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat has vehemently opposed the present application and stated that the offences alleged against the applicant are serious one and against the State and even the applicant having proclivity to indulge in such type of activity and therefore, he requested to dismiss the present application. In support of his submissions, learned APP has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Daxaben vs. State of Gujarat and Others reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 936.

[8.0] I have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments canvassed by learned advocates appearing for respective parties. [8.1] Going through the documents, it appears that FIR being CR No.11191024230814 of 2023 dated 23.07.2023 came to be registered against the applicant with Ramol Police Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 328 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act. After investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed against the applicant on 25.09.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 328, 376(2)(n) of the IPC and under Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.

[8.2] The respondent No.2 – original complainant has alleged that the accused has misused her and identified himself as an Advocate and after the death of her husband, both came into contact of each other and started living in live-in relationship but as the applicant – accused was having some objectionable photographs and material of the respondent No.2, applicant asked to pay Rs.10 lakh to discontinue the relationship with him and on 20.07.2023, applicant also qu