IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7774/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 7774 of 2026
VINIT @ BONNY MANOJBHAI KESHAVLAL PATEL & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Appearance:
JIGNESHKUMAR M NAYAK(8558) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR.MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR.MANGAL GADHAVI for RESPONDENT NO.2
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 01/05/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr.Manan Maheta waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent-State and learned advocate Mr.Mangal Gadhavi waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent no.2-complainant.
2. Learned advocate Mr.Jigneshkumar Nayak does not press this application for applicant no.1 i.e Vinit @ Bonny Manojbhai Keshavlal Patel. Permission as prayed for is granted. This application is disposed of as withdrawn qua applicant no.1 Vinit @ Bonny Manojbhai Keshavlal Patel.
3. The present application is filed for quashment of the FIR being 11216025230079/2023 registered with Santej Police Station on the ground of settlement. It is submitted by learned advocate that though the allegation against applicant is under section 307 of IPC however, the nature of the injuries are not such that the ingredients of section 307 would satisfy. In addition to that, it is submitted by learned advocate Mr.Nayak that in the FIR the name of the applicants are not stated. It is further submitted that the history which is given before the doctor wherein, it is that vehicular accident occurred on 02.03.2023, the complainant has received injury. It is further submitted that the dispute is resolved between the parties and the trial would be a futile exercise, in that background, the present application is required to be allowed and the FIR is required to be quashed qua the applicant.
3.1. Learned advocate Mr.Mangal Gadhavi, appearing for the complainant, has supported the above submission and filed affidavit of respondent no.2 reiterating the above aspect.
3.2. Learned APP Mr.Manan Maheta has vehemently opposed this application.
4. This Court has noted the presence of the complainant and referred the affidavit filed by the complainant, which is ordered to be taken on record and reproduced hereinbelow:
“I, Shaileshsinh @ Shailendrasinh @ Sodha Chhailsingh Gokalsingh, Male, Aged about 34 Years, Occupation: Service, Residing at: 38, Anmol Aangan, Opp. Atulya Bungalows, Village: Saij, Ta. Kalol, District: Gandhinagar, the Respondent No.2 orig. complainant herein, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under :-
1. I am the respondent no.2-orig. complainant in the memo of petition and I am fully conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and I am duly competent to file this affidavit.
2. I say that I have gone through the memo of petition and the facts stated in the memo of petition are not disputed by me. At the outset 1 say and submit that the disputes and grievances of both the sides have been amicably settled and I do not wish to prosecute the petitioners any further with respect to the F.I.R. being C.R. No. 11216025230079 of 2023 Registered with Santej Police Station, Gandhinagar for the offences punishable u/s 307, 325 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.
3. I say and submit that, my real name is Chhelsinh Gokalsingh Sodha, however, typographical error in the FIR, it is mentioned as Shaileshsinh @ Shailendrasinh.
4. I say that, after the above stated incident, I was sustained the fractures on different parts of legs and hands and now I am out of danger and my own wish and volition, and I have settled the dispute with the Petitioners.
5. I say that the there was no enmity between myself and the present petitioners. Infect, both the parties are belongs to same aria and having family relation with each other since long. I say that I have settled the dispute with them and I do not wish to go on with the FIR filed by me against them. I say and submit that FIR in question was lodged by me out of misunderstanding, misconception, desperation, anger and anxiety and therefore also I do not want to prosecute petitioners any further for the FIR impugned in the present petition.
6. I say that after registration of the impugned FIR, a meeting took place between families of both the sides and the misunderstanding between us got cleared. Also upon i
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.