R/CR.MA/25123/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.petition (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 25123 of 2024 ========================================================== SANKETBHAI BHARATBHAI SHELADIYA & ANR. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR.KISHAN PRAJAPATI(7074) for the petitioners(s) No. 1,2 MR PINAKIN B RAVAL(3468) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR RONAK RAVAL, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR MAHESH POOJARA, for Respondent No. 3 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 18/06/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Leave to join the victim girl, namely Siddhi W/o. Sanket Bharatbhai Sheladiya (D/o. Jagdishbhai Balubhai Teraiya), as party Respondent No.3 is granted. Amendment to be carried out, forthwith. 2. At the outset, learned Advocate, Mr. Raval, appearing for the complainant – Respondent No.2, who happens to be the father of the victim girl, submitted that Respondent No.2 is not agreeable for quashing of the FIR. However, learned Advocate, Mr. Poojara, appearing for the victim girl submitted that the victim girl is present before this Court in person and he duly identified her and submitted that the victim girl has already married the present petitioner No.1 and she has been residing with him for the last about four months and she also has filed affidavit dated 18.06.2025, which may be taken on the record and requested this Court to ascertain her willingness, as well. 2.1 In the above background, this matter was taken-up for hearing, today. Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/25123/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025 3. Rule. Learned APP, Mr. Ronak Raval, waives service for Respondent No.1 - State, learned Advocate, Mr. Pinakin Raval, for Respondent No.2-the complainant and learned Advocate, Mr. Mahesh Poojara, for the newly added Respondent No.3 - the victim girl. 4. By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ”the Code”), the petitionerss have prayed for quashing and setting aside the F.I.R., bearing 11193018230561 of 2023, registered with Dhari Police Station, Amreli, under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(j)(n) and 114 of the IPC and Sections 4, 6, 17 and 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR, including POCSO Case No. 3 of 2024, pending before the learned Additional Special Judge, Dhari, qua the petitionerss. 5. Heard. Affidavit dated 18.06.2025, filed by the victim girl – Respondent No.3 is taken on record, wherein, she has stated that she has married to petitioner No.1 and she has been residing with petitioner No.1 happily and therefore, she does not want to proceed with the FIR filed by Respondent No.2, who happens to be her father, and made a request to quash the same. 5.1 I am conscious of the fact that Respondent No.2- complainant, who is represented by learned Advocate, Mr. Pinakin Raval, is not agreeable for the quashing of the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings and instead stated that Respondent No.2 wants to pursue the impugned FIR and the R/CR.MA/25123/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025 proceedings initiated pursuant thereto. However, when the victim girl – Respondent No.3, herself, has personally remained present before this Court and is duly identified by learned Advocate, Mr. Poojara, and has stated orally as well as on oath by filing affidavit that she has married petitioner No.1 out of her own free will on 02.02.2024, i.e. almost before one year, and since then, they have been residing together happily as husband and wife, keeping in mind the overall welfare of the newly weeded couple, it would be just and proper to quash the impugned complaint, as otherwise, the trial would become a futile exercise, as the victim girl Respondent No.3 has already married Petitioner No.1. Therefore, though, there is resistance on the part of Respondent No.2, I am of the opinion that the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings deserves to be dismissed. 5.2 Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present petition as well as taking into consideration the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of ‘Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.’, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, ‘Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab’, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, ‘Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.’, reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, ‘Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors.’, reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and ‘Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.’, reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the petitioners would be unnecessary harassment to the petitioners. I have also considered the latest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme R/CR.MA/25123/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2025 Court in the case of ‘Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat’, Criminal Appeal No.1723 of 2017, dated 4.10.2017 and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision, particularly Paragraph-15, thereof. Considering the nature of disputes between the parties which are all private in nature, I am of the opinion that the matter requires consideration. It appears that the trial would be futile and further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code. 6. Resultantly, this petition is ALLOWED and the impugned F.I.R., bearing 11193018230561 of 2023, registered with Dhari Police Station, Amreli, and all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR, including POCSO Case No. 3 of 2024, pending before the learned Additional Special Judge, Dhari, are hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioners only. Consequently, all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid F.I.R. are also quashed and set aside qua the petitioners. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) UMESH/- Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: CHAVDA UMESH(HC00203), Principal pvt Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 18/06/2025 17:29:18