IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 4271 of 2026 ==========================================================

VISHNU @ BABU S/O BRAJKISHOR SINGH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR. RAAJEN D JADHAV(10026) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS Date : 23/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Learned advocate Ms. Ankita Goswami appears and submits that she has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent No. 2- complainant. She is permitted to file her appearance.

Registry shall accept her vakalatnama.

2. By way of filing this application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant- accused has prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being C.R. No.11210062260008 of 2026 registered with the Cyber Crime Police Station, Surat City, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Section 66-D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto qua the applicant.

3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant is virtually present before this Court. Learned advocate appearing for the complainant has produced the identity proof of the complainant, which is ordered to be taken on record. The affidavit filed by the complainant is annexed at Annexure- B to the application. In the said affidavit, the complainant has categorically stated that the dispute with the applicant has been resolved and there is no ill-will or any grievance amongst them.

4. Considering the issue involved in the present application as well as considering the fact that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved, with the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for final disposal.

5. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Manan Maheta waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 State. Learned advocate Ms. Ankita Goswami waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.2- complainant.

6. The complainant, who is virtually present in the Court, has categorically stated that the dispute has been amicably resolved with the applicant and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed. Thus, sending the applicant-accused to face the trial would be a futile exercise.

7. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the complainant read thus:

“1. That I am the original complainant who has lodged the FIR being C.R. No. 1121006226008 of 2026 dated 27.01.2026, registered with Cyber Crime Police Station, Surat, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 338, 336(3) & 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (as amended in 2008).

2. I state that upon intervention of the prominent members of the society, friends and elderly persons an amicable settlement has been arrived at between me and the petitioner and now entire dispute between me and the petitioner have now settled and an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the present Applicant and me, and the dispute spute between us has been fully and finally resolved.

3. That pursuant to the said settlement, the disputed amount as mentioned in the complaint, i.e. Rs. 6,05,390)-, has been duly received by me from the Applicant, and I hereby confirm and acknowledge the receipt of the same to my full satisfaction.

Therefore, no grievance or claim remains pending between us.

4. That the present complaint was filed due to a financial fraud committed upon me, which has now been amicably settled and compromised between the Applicant and me. Therefore, the dispute is purely personal in nature and does not affect t