R/CR.MA/15451/2018 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 15451 of 2018 ========================================================== QUITYBEN VISHALBHAI MEHTA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MADANSINGH O BAROD(3128) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS SANGITA M. CHAUHAN(11842) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 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 Ms. Sangita Chauhan appears and submits that she has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2 – original complainant and she has already her appearance in the Registry. 2. By way of preferring the present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the First Information Report being I-C.R. No. 94 of 2018 registered with the Navrangpura Police Station, District Ahmedabad City, for the o1ences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto. Page 1 of 4 R/CR.MA/15451/2018 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant is present before this Court through virtual mode. Learned advocate appearing for the complainant has produced identity card as well as an a1idavit of the complainant, which are annexed to the application. In the said a1idavit, the complainant has categorically stated that with the intervention of the friends, family members and community people, the dispute 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 5nal 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 Ms. Sangita Chauhan waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 – complainant. 6. Learned advocate for the applicant-accused has submitted that since the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties, the application may be allowed and the impugned FIR may be quashed and set-aside. R/CR.MA/15451/2018 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 7. The complainant, who is personally present in the Court, has categorically stated before this Court that she has no objection if the application is allowed and the FIR is quashed and set-aside. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that sending the applicant-accused to face the trial would be nothing but a futile exercise and would amount to abuse of process of law. 8. The relevant paragraphs of the a1idavit 5led by the complainant – Sangeetaben @/o Rajkumar reads thus : “3. That in the present case, after lodgment of the FIR, full an nal settlement / compromise has been arrived at between the applicant and complainant - herein respondent No.2 i.e. mine. 4. In the present case, the impugned FIR was lodged in hot haste. However, full and nal amicable settlement has taken place between me and the applicant upon being persuade by the other known persons and reputed person of the society 5. That, therefore the respondent No.2 original complainant does not intend to prosecute with the case any further, and intends to state that he has no objection if the impugned is quashed and set aside in the interest of justice.” 9. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application and taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, 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 & Another, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 31, Manoj Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 190, R/CR.MA/15451/2018 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as well as State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it appears that further continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicant-accused would be nothing but unnecessary harassment to the applicant- accused. It further appears that the trial would be a futile exercise and continuing further 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 all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto 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 proceedings of the First Information Report being I-C.R. No. 94 of 2018 registered with the Navrangpura Police Station, District Ahmedabad City, for the o1ences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside, qua the present applicant. 11. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted. (VIMAL K. VYAS, J) AMAR SINGH Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: AMAR SINGH(HC01081), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/12/2025 11:15:48