R/CR.MA/14513/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 14513 of 2021 ========================================================== VED SON OF DHARMINBHAI PATHAK Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR JIGAR G GADHAVI(5613) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NIRMIT ATULBHAI DIXIT(8853) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR VANDAN K BAXI(5863) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 NANAVATI & NANAVATI(1933) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR CHINTAN DAVE, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 13/10/2025 ORAL ORDER 2. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ”the Code”), the petitioner prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR being C.R.No.II - 375 of 2019 registered with Vastrapur Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 294(B), 506(2) of the IPC as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the petitioner herein. 3. Seeking quashment of the impugned FIR, learned advocate for the petitioner would submit that if the FIR is taken on its face value, it could be most be a dispute /misunderstanding within family members and that the civil dispute has given colour of criminality. He would further submit that taking the FIR on its R/CR.MA/14513/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2025 face value, essential ingredients of sections 504 and 506(2) of the IPC are missing agaisnt the petitioner. Upon such submission, he prays to allow this petition. 4. Per contra, learned advocate for the complainant after argument to some extent, failed to point out that how the offences u/s 323, 504, 506(2) of the IPC is made out, as civil dispute has been given colour of criminaility. Upon such submission, he prays to pass necessary orders. 4.1 Learned APP considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, prays to pass necessary orders. 5. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. 6. Perusing the contents of the FIR, what could be noticed that so far as offence punishable u/s 504 and 506(2) of the IPC are concerned, there cannot be an intentional insult with an intent to provoke breach of peace. These essential ingredients are totally lacking on reading the FIR as well as all the evidence on record. At no point of time, it comes on record that because of intentional insult by the accused, the complainant was provoked to break public peace or to commit any other offence. Considering the contents of the FIR, the prosecution failed to bring the case within four corners of “with an intent to cause alarm to the complainant”. 7. In the case of State of Haryana Vs. B.Bhajanlal & ors., AIR 1992 SC 604, the Hon’ble Apex Court summed up the proposition of law, which reads as under:- R/CR.MA/14513/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2025 “(1) Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations ins the F.I.R. and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under S.156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of S.155(2) of the code. (3) Where, the uncontroverted allegations made in the F.I.R. or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same donot disclose the commission of any offence and make out the case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under S.155(2) of the Code. (5) Whether, the allegations made in the F.I.R. or complaint are sO absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where, there is an express legal bare engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) toi the institution and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge." R/CR.MA/14513/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2025 7.1 The findings of the Hon’ble Apex Court in para 1,3 and 7 are attracted in the present case. In view of above, present petition deserves consideration. 8. This Court is quite conscious that power u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is extraordinary power and should be used sparingly, as the exercise of such power would scuttle the FIR at the threshold. But, if the FIR fails to make out essential ingredients of the offence, power should be exercised. 9. Resultantly, this application is allowed. The impugned FIR being C.R.No.II - 375 of 2019 registered with Vastrapur Police Station filed against the present petitioner is hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, all other proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR are also quashed and set aside. Direct service is permitted. (J. C. DOSHI,J) SHEKHAR P. BARVE Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: SHEKHAR PRAFULBHAI BARVE(HC00200), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 13/10/2025 13:12:41