R/CR.MA/24286/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 24286 of 2025 ========================================================== ASHWINBHAI UJAMSHIBHAI THAKKAR & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR JAYPRAKASH UMOT(3581) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5 MR. MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS Date : 08/12/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Learned advocate Mr. Nitiraj Desai appears and submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2 - complainant. He is permitted to le his appearance. Registry shall accept his vakalatnama. 2. By way of preferring the present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicants-accused seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the Criminal Case No.3520 of 2025 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sanand, Ahmedabad (Rural) and the First Information Report No.11192003240458 of 2024 registered with the Sanand G.I.D.C. Police Station, Ahmedabad (Rural), for the o7ences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto. 3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant - Mr.Rahul Laxmanbhai Chorge, who is personally present before this R/CR.MA/24286/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 Court, has led an a;davit and produced his identity proof, which are ordered to be taken on record. In the said a;davit, the complainant has categorically stated that due to intervention of the merchants of both the companies, the dispute between him and the applicants-accused has been amicably 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 has been amicably resolved between the parties, with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for nal 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 and learned advocate Mr.Nitiraj Desai waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 – complainant. 6. Learned advocate appearing for the applicants-accused has submitted that with the intervention of the merchants of both the companies, the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved now, therefore, he has urged that the present application may be allowed and the impugned FIR may be quashed and set- aside. 7. The complainant- Mr.Rahul Laxmanbhai Chorge, who is personally present in the Court, has categorically stated before this Court that he has no objection, if the application is allowed and the FIR as well as the proceedings of the criminal case are quashed and set-aside. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that sending the applicants-accused to face the trial would be nothing but a futile R/CR.MA/24286/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 exercise and would amount to abuse of process of law. 8. The relevant paragraphs of the a;davit led by the original complainant read thus : “2. That, as the dispute is personal in nature and because of the intervention of the merchants of the both the company, an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parites. That, a copy of notorized adavit led by the complainant / respondent no.2 dated 18/10/2025 demonstrating the fact that the dispute is settled between the parties is at Annexure -C. 3. I say and submits that after lodging the F.I.R. at Annexure-A, I realized that a minor dispute has taken a massive shape and the nature of hardship and inconvenience socially and mentally cause to both the sides. I further say and submits that the further continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners in relation to the impugned F.I.R would cause unnecessary harassment and the continuance of trial pursuant to the mutual settlement arrived between the parties would be futile exercise. ” 9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, as well as considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application and also taking into consideration the decisions rendered 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) as well as State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it appears that continuing further with the criminal R/CR.MA/24286/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicants- accused would be an unnecessary harassment to the applicants- accused. It further appears that the trial would be a futile exercise and further continuing with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR and said criminal case and all other consequential proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 10. In the result, the application is allowed. The Criminal Case No.3520 of 2025 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sanand, Ahmedabad (Rural) and the First Information Report No.11192003240458 of 2024 registered with the Sanand G.I.D.C. Police Station, Ahmedabad (Rural), for the o7ences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside. 11. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted. (VIMAL K. VYAS, J) prk Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: PIYUSH RAMESHBHAI KANOJIYA(HC01390), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/12/2025 17:45:13