R/SCR.A/7785/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 7785 of 2025 ========================================================== DESAI BAVIK ISHWARBHAI & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR MIHIRKUMAR R DARJI(11213) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5 MS DHWANI TRIPATHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 07/07/2025 ORAL ORDER [1.0] Registry to accept vakalatnama of learned advocate Mr. Shadkhan who has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama. [2.0] RULE. Learned advocates waive service of note of rule on behalf of the respective respondents. [3.0] 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. [4.0] By way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the BNSS, the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being CR No.11191034250039 of 2025 registered with Naranpura Police R/SCR.A/7785/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 Station, Ahmedabad City for the offences punisable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 190, 191(1), 191(2), 191(3) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and to quash all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom. [5.0] Learned advocate for the petitioners has 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 17.05.2025 which is produced at Annexure-B of the petition. 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. [6.0] Learned APP has opposed the present petition on the ground that petitioners are named as assailants and it is not the incident took place in spur of moment as the petitioner No.1 had called petitioner Nos.2 to 5 at the scene of offence armed with sticks and thereafter all of them assaulted the complainant due to which the complainant sustained four to five fractures and therefore, considering the seriousness of offence, she has requested to dismiss the present petition. [7.0] Going through the impugned FIR, it appears that the impugned FIR is filed at the instance of respondent No.2, wherein it is alleged that petitioner No.1 herein – accused No.1 having R/SCR.A/7785/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 married with the girl friend of the complainant, keeping suspicion and grudge of the fact that complainant is having relations with his wife, had called for other four accused persons i.e. petitioner Nos.2 to 5 herein armed with sticks and assaulted the complainant with kick and fist and petitioner No.1 slapped the complainant. Initially, petitioner No.1 only was named in the FIR but during the investigation petitioner Nos.2 to 5 herein have been arraigned as accused. However, during the pendency of investigation, parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and even affidavit of settlement is filed by respondent No.2, which is at Annexure-B of the present petition, wherein respondent No.2 has affirmed the factum of settlement. Further, it is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioners, under the instructions from the petitioners, that the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedent. Considering the fact that the offences are private in nature and not against the State and the fact that matter is amicably settled, present petition deserves consideration. [8.0] It is necessary to consider whether the power conferred by the High Court under section 482 of the CrPC is warranted. It is true that the powers under Section 482 of the Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. The Court must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. The High Court being the highest court of a State R/SCR.A/7785/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. Of course, no hard-and-fast rule can be laid down in regard to cases in which the High Court will exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction of quashing the proceeding at any stage as the Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Ravi Shankar Srivastava, IAS & Anr., reported in AIR 2006 SC 2872. [9.0] 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 also considering the fact that offence is private in nature and not against the State and now as the dispute is amicably settled, there is no chance of breach of public tranquility and hence, in the opinion of this Court, the further continuation of criminal proceedings against the present petitioners in relation to the impugned FIR would cause R/SCR.A/7785/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 unnecessary harassment to the petitioners. Further, even the complainant has affirmed the fact of settlement and filing of affidavit by her. 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.. [10.0] In the result, petition is allowed. The impugned FIR being CR No.11191034250039 of 2025 registered with Naranpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside qua the present petitioners. 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. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent only. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) Ajay Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 07/07/2025 18:41:22