PAURAV VINODBHAI SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.Sanjay Prajapati, learned advocate for the applicantoriginal accused, Ms.Moxa Thakkar, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1State and Mr.Chirag Parekh, learned advocate for respondent No.2first informant.

(2.) BY way of the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code) the applicantoriginal accused has prayed for quashing of F.I.R. being C.R. No.I267 of 2012 registered at Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences under Sections 452, 506(2), 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC) as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid F.I.R.

(3.) MR .Sanjay Prajapati, learned advocate for the applicantoriginal accused, has taken this Court to the factual matrix arising out of the present application. It is submitted that the allegations leveled in the impugned F.I.R. as such do not constitute any offence as alleged and the same is of a domestic nature. It is submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise deed dated 05.02.2013 and the first informant i.e. respondent No.2 has also made an affidavit dated 19.12.2012, copy of which is produced on record. Relying upon the compromise deed dated 05.02.2013, which is also placed on record, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute and hence, any further continuation of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned F.I.R. shall amount to harassment to the applicant and in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties trial would be futile and the same would also amount to abuse of process of law and court. It is submitted that in order to secure the ends of justice, this Court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code and may quash the impugned F.I.R. as well as all consequential proceedings arising out of the impugned F.I.R.