VISHAL PRAFULCHANDRA MEHTA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Ashish Dagli, learned Advocate for the applicants, Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned APP. for respondent ­ State and Mr. Mahesh Poojara, learned Advocate for respondent no.2-the first informant.

(2.) BY way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 ('Code' for short) the applicants have prayed for quashing the FIR registered with Rajkot Mahila Police Station being CR No. I-260 of 2012 for the alleged offences u/Ss. 498A, 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of IPC. Mr. Dagli, learned Counsel appearing for the applicants has submitted that applicant no.1 and respondent no.2 - the first informant have entered into a compromise deed dated 11.2.2013 and have also entered into consent deed of divorce on the same day and at present applicant no.1 and the first informant stay separately. Mr. Dagli submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the issue which was of a personal nature and therefore any further continuance of criminal proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to harassment to the applicants. Mr. Dagli submitted that same would also amount to abuse of process of Court and law. Mr. Dagli further submitted that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties the trial would be futile and hence, this is a fit case and this Court would be pleased to exercise its inherent power u/S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) MR . Mahesh K. Poojara, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no.2 ­ the first informant has tendered an affidavit of respondent no.2 ­ the first informant and the same is taken on record. Mr. Poojara has submitted that as averred in the affidavit, the parties have amicably settled the matrimonial dispute and reiterated the contentions raised by Mr. Dagli, learned Advocate for the applicants.