IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 25312 of 2025 ========================================================== HASANBHAI S/O RAHIMBHAI KHEDARA & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MS N M ZAVERI(13091) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6 MR. MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS Date : 08/01/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. Learned advocate Mr. A. U. Vhora appears and submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2 – original complainant. 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 First Information Report No. 11213022250417 of 2025 registered with the Jetpur City Police Station, Rajkot Rural, for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 87, 351(3), 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as the Charge-sheet filed as C.C. No. 2361 of 2025, as also all other consequential proceedings p. 2 arising pursuant thereto. 3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant is personally present before this Court. The complainant has stated that she got married with the accused – Rizwan @ Rizu Salimbhai Khedara under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and their marriage has been registered before the Joint Sub Registrar – I, R.O. Ranga Reddy District. The complainant has filed an affidavit, which is annexed as Annexure ‘C’ to the application. In the said affidavit, the complainant has categorically stated that with the intervention of the friends, family members and community people, the dispute between the parties 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 final 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. A.U. Vhora waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 – complainant. p. 3 6. Learned advocate for the applicants-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. 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 applicants-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 affidavit filed by the complainant, read thus : “ I state that the dispute between myself and Accused No. 1 has been amicably resolved, and I have already expressed my no- objection to the quashing of the FIR and the charge sheet in respect of Accused No. 1. I further state that the co-accused named in the FIR have no role, no involvement, and no participation in the alleged incident. Their names came to be added only due to misunderstanding and family pressure, and there is no allegation from my side against any of the co-accused. I voluntarily state that I have no objection if the Hon'ble Court quashes the FIR and all consequential proceedings against the co-accused persons also, as continuing the criminal proceedings against them would serve no purpose” 9. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the facts and p. 4 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, 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 applicants-accused would be nothing but unnecessary harassment to the applicants- 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 First Information Report No. 11213022250417 of 2025 registered with the Jetpur City Police Station, Rajkot Rural, for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 87, 351(3), 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as the Charge-sheet p. 5 filed as C.C. No. 2361 of 2025, as also all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside, qua the present applicants only. 11. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted. (VIMAL K. VYAS, J) AMAR SINGH