IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DOMESTIC VIOLANCE ) NO.

13903 of 2025 ==========================================================

NIRAVKUMAR KANAIYALAL PATEL Versus MONICA W/O. NIRAVKUMAR KANAIYALAL PATEL D/O. VISHNUBHAI KARSANDAS PATEL & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR JIGNESH B SHAH(5217) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR RJ GOSWAMI(1102) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 14/10/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Learned advocate Mr. Lakshit V Patel states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and thereby, seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama, which is granted. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

2. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of notice 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 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the applicant has 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 all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

5. Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the applicants have nothing to do with the offence and they are falsely implicated in the offence. However, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and they have no objection if the complaint is quashed. Therefore, the application may be allowed.

6. 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, which is taken / placed on record. In the Affidavit, the original complainant have categorically stated that the dispute with the applicant 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.

7. Having heard the learned advocates on both sides and considering the documents on record, it appears that proceedings against the father-in-law and mother-law has already been quashed by this Court vide order dated 08.10.2025 passed in Special Criminal Application No.11152 of 2024. In view of 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./528 of BNSS.

8. In the aforesaid backdrop, complaint is filed. It is necessary to consider whether the power conferred by the High Court under section 528 of BNSS/482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is warranted. It is true that the powers under Section 52