IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 15806 of 2023 ============================================

PRITIBA BALDEVSINH RANA & ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR VIRAT G POPAT(3710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5 MR. JAY M THAKKAR(6677) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ============================================

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

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 complaint being FIR No.11202001230038 of 2023 registered with Mahila Police Station, Jamnagar for the offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

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 30.09.2025 which is placed on record. In the Affidavit, the original complainant has categorically stated that the dispute with the petitioner 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 appeared through virtual mode 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), as well as Dara Lakshminarayan Vs State of Bihar, reported in 2025 (3) SCC 735, and Shobhitkumar Mittal Vs State of UP, reported in 2025 INSC 1152 considering the facts that the impugned FIR against the husband is already been quashed vide order dated 08.10.2025 in Criminal Misc. Application No.20648 of 2025 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 FIR and all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C..

6) In the result, the petition is allowed. The impugned complaint being FIR No.11202001230038 of 2023 registered with Mahila Police Station, Jamnagar 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