The court emphasized the importance of quashing FIR in cases where amicable settlements exist to prevent undue harassment to the accused.

ORAL ORDER

In para 5 of the order dated 20.06.2025 passed by this Court, words “The parties are separated” stands substituted with words “parties are living together”.

Present note for speaking to minutes is disposed of in aforesaid terms. Registry to issue fresh writ accordingly.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)

Ajay

8409 of 2025 ==========================================================

MAHENDRAKUMAR JIVABHAI METIYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR D S GADHVI(11310) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR ROHAN SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR DHAVAL BAROT, ADVOCATE for the Complainant ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 20/06/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Learned advocate Mr. Dhaval Barot states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and thereby, seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama, which is granted.

2. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of note of rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and since it is jointly stated at the bar by learned advocates on both the sides that the dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “ Cr.P.C .”), the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the complaint being FIR No.11195035241021 of 2024 registred at Palanpur Taluka Police Station, Banaskantha, for the offences under Sections 85, 115(2), 296(b) and 54 of BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

5. Learned advocates for the respective parties submitted that during the pendency of proceedings, the parties have settled the dispute amicably and pursuant to such mutual settlement, the original complainant has also filed an AfÏdavit, which is taken / placed on record. The parties are separated. In the AfÏdavit, the original complainant has categorically stated that the dispute with the applicant/s has been resolved amicably and that she has no objection, if the present proceedings are quashed and set aside since there is no surviving grievance between them. Further, this Court has quashed the same FIR qua other co-accused vide order dated 10.06.2025.

6. Having heard learned advocates on both the sides and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of (i) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, (ii) Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab , reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582 , (iii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, (iv) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and (v) Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC) in the opinion of this Court, the further continuation of criminal proceedings against the applicant/s in relation to the impugned FIR would cause unnecessary harassment to the applicant/s. Further, the continuance of trial pursuant to the mutual settlement arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to quash and set aside the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C ..

7. The applicant is facing charge of Section 498A of IPC.