CR.MA/5166/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 5166 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= VIREN BHIKHABHAI KADIA Versus ANILBHAI YADAVBHAI GHAVDE & ANR ========================================================= Appearance : MR H.S.MULIA for Applicant:1 MR V.M.PANCHOLI, for Respondent:1 MR KP RAVAL, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent:2 ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI Date : 07/05/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. RULE. Mr.V.M.Pancholi, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr.K.P.Raval, learned Additional Public CR.MA/5166/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2-State of Gujarat. 2. Having regard to the facts of the case, with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing today. 3. The facts briefly stated are that the respondent No.1 herein had lodged a complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural), being Inquiry Case No.250 of 2007 against the present petitioner alleging commission of offences under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, which was subsequently registered as Ghatlodia Police Station M.Case No.5 of 2007. 4. It appears that subsequently the parties have amicably settled the dispute between them which has been reduced in writing by way of a compromise deed dated 12th April, 2008, whereby the parties have agreed that the complainant would not prosecute the complaint being Inquiry Case No.250 of 2007 any further and that the petitioner-original accused would not file any case for defamation or any criminal or civil proceedings in connection therewith. 5. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has filed the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, ('the Code'), praying to quash the Inquiry Case No.250 of 2007, pending before the learned Chief Judicial CR.MA/5166/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) and M.Case No.5 of 2007 registered before the Ghatlodia Police Station. 6. Mr.H.S.Mulia, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of Court. He has, accordingly, prayed that the complaint in question be quashed in the interest of justice. 7. Mr.Vipul Pancholi, learned advocate for respondent No.1- original complainant has submitted that the respondent No.1-complainant is present before this Court and on his instructions he has submitted that complaint in question be quashed in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 8. It is settled legal position as held by the Apex Court as well as various High Courts including this Court that considering the nature of the offences alleged, the Court can, in the facts and circumstances of a case, quash the complaint even if the offences alleged therein are not compoundable. Looking to the nature of the allegations made in the complaint, this Court is of the view that considering the settlement arrived at between the parties, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting the proceedings to continue. Besides, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, chances of an ultimate conviction are also bleak. This is, therefore, a fit case for exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the complaint. CR.MA/5166/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT 9. For the foregoing reasons, the application succeeds and is, accordingly, allowed. Inquiry Case No.250 of 2007, pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) and M.Case No.5 of 2007 registered before the Ghatlodia Police Station, are hereby quashed. Rule is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted. (HARSHA DEVANI, J.) Amit/-