IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DOMESTIC VIOLANCE )

NO. 11152 of 2024 ============================================

KANAIYALAL AMTHALAL PATEL & ANR.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR JIGNESH B SHAH(5217) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2 MR RJ GOSWAMI(1102) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2 MR JIGAR D DAVE(6528) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 08/10/2025

ORAL ORDER

1) RULE. Learned advocates waive service of notice of rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

2) 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.

3) By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “CRPC”), the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the proceedings of Criminal Misc. Application No.3289 of 2024 pending before the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) filed under Domestic Violence Act and

4) 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 Affidavit dated 04.10.2025 which is taken on record. In the Affidavit, the original complainant has categorically stated that the dispute with the petitioners has been resolved amicably and that he has no objection, if the present proceedings are quashed and set aside since there is no surviving grievance between them. The complainant is present in-person and identified by her learned Advocate. The complainant has admitted the factum of settlement.

5) 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) considering the facts that the petitioners are in-laws of the complainant and consent divorce is filed by the complainant and her husband and as the dispute is private in nature, in the opinion of this Court, the further continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner in relation to the impugned FIR would cause unnecessary harassment to the petitioner. 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 complaint and under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C..

6) In the result, the petition is allowed. The impugned complaint being Criminal Misc. Application No.3289 of 2024 pending before the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioners herein. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. If the petitioners are in jail, the jail authority concerned is directed to release the petitioners forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case.

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)

ANKIT