R/SCR.A/10023/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR MAINTENANCE) NO. 10023 of 2025 ========================================================== PRAKASHBHAI CHANDUBHAI SOYANTAR THRO SOYANTAR BHARATIBEN CHANDUBHAI Versus MANISHABEN W/O PRAKASH SOYANTAR, D/O BHANUBHAI PARMAR & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR HANNAN A QURESHI(11351) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 16/07/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Learned advocate Mr. V. R. Parekh, states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent No.1 wife 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 note 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 petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, the petitioner, through his mother, has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 11.10.2021 passed by Family Court, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Misc. Application No. 831/2020 and enlarge the petitioner on regular bail. 5. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that wife has filed proceedings under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for maintenance before learned R/SCR.A/10023/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2025 Family Court, in which maintenance of Rs.5,000/- was awarded to the wife. It is submitted that, as the petitioner failed to comply with the order passed by Family Court, respondent No. 1 wife initiated proceedings under Section 125(3) of the code, before Family Court for recovery of maintenance amount which was due for 21 months being Rs.1,05,000/-. Pursuant to the same, ld. Family Court issued notice to the petitioner, but the petitioner did not remain present and therefore, warrant came to be issued against the petitioner and he was arrested. Now the petitioner is in jail since 27.06.2025. 6. Learned counsel for the respective parties submitted that during the pendency of proceedings, the husband – wife have settled the dispute amicably and pursuant to such mutual settlement, the wife has also filed an Affidavit, which is taken / placed on record. In the Affidavit, she has categorically stated that the dispute with the applicant/s has been resolved amicably and they decided to continue their marriage life and live together as husband and wife. Wife has no objection, if the order dated 11.10.2021 passed by learned Family Court, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Misc. Application No. 831/2020 is quashed and enlarge the petitioner on regular bail. 6. 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), in the opinion of this Court, the further continuation of proceedings against the applicant/s would cause unnecessary harassment to the applicant/s. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to quash and set aside the impugned order. R/SCR.A/10023/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/07/2025 7. In the result, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 11.10.2021 passed by Family Court, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Misc. Application No. 831/2020 is hereby quashed and set aside and the jail authority concerned is directed to release the applicant forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned jail authority forthwith through fax also. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: PATEL SUCHIT JAYESHBHAI(HC01083), Private Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 16/07/2025 18:46:34