ANIRUDHSINH MAHIPATSINH JADEJA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent-State and learned advocate Mr. Hardik A. Dave waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent No.2.

(2.) By way of present application, applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the impugned complaint F.I.R. being C.R.No. 11210008201208 of 2020 dated 24.08.2020 registered with Sarthana Police Station, Surat City for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 447, 448, 452, 387, 506(2), 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, Section 25 (1-A), 25(1-b) (a) and 29 of the Arms Act and Sections 38, 39 and 40 of the Gujarat Money Lenders Act, 2011 & Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act as well as proceedings arising therefrom qua the present applicant. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and learned APP for the respondent-State.

(3.) Learned advocate for the applicant submits that after lodging impugned complaint, compromise was taken place between the parties amicably and dispute has now been resolved. Hence, he has requested to quash and set aside the impugned complaint qua himpresent applicant. Looking to the nature of the offence, learned APP for the respondent-State has requested not to quash the complaint. Learned APP has submitted the report of the Police Inspector, Crime Branch, Surat City dated 12.04.2021 which is taken on record. Learned APP has objected to the present application and submitted that the present applicant is a criminal minded person and against him total five offences were registered of a grievous in nature. Therefore, the present application cannot be entertained. Learned advocate Mr. Dagli for the applicant submitted that out of five offences as shown in the report, in the offence registered before Gondal City Police Station being C.R. No. 105 of 1988, applicant was convicted while in other offences he was acquitted by the competent Court of Law.