Aejhajbhai @ Aeju Rafikbhai Belim vs State Of Gujarat

@Judgmenttag-Judgment

S.H.Vora, J

Learned advocate Mr. Anurag Rathod states that he has instructions to appear for respondent No.2 â€" complainant and victim- Ms.Mantasaben

Aaudbhai. He is permitted to file his Vakalatnama. He has produced affidavit of the complainant and victim, which is ordered to be taken on record.

Respondent no.2 â€" complainant and victim are present before the Court and admits correctness and genuineness of the affidavit filed by them

through their learned advocate. Learned advocate Mr.Anurag Rathod identifies respondent no.2 and victim and confirms correctness and genuineness

of the affidavit filed by them.

Rule. Learned A.P.P. and learned advocate Mr. Anurag Rathod waive service of Rule for respondent Nos.1 and 2 respectively.

With the consent of learned advocate for the applicant and learned advocate for respondents, present application is taken up for final disposal today.

By way of the present applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the ‘Code’), the applicant prays for

quashing and setting aside the F.I.R. being C.R.No.I-96 of 2019 registered with Mahuva Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 363,

366, and 376(2)(J)(N) of IPC and under the provisions of the POCSO Act.

Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present applications.

It is now stated at bar that the applicant, respondent No.2 and the victim have settled the dispute amicably and the victim has no grievance against

the applicant. Not only that the victim and the applicant have married on 28.12.2019 and the victim is pregnant also. They have produced copy of

Nikahnama annexed at Annexure â€" C.

It is in light of this aspect, the applicant, respondent No.2 and the victim urged that impugned criminal proceedings being impugned FIR may be

quashed.

Learned advocate appearing for the contesting respondent No.2 and the victim points out that since the victim has already married with the

applicant, it will be more in her interest that the impugned criminal proceedings may be quashed, as otherwise, their marital life will be put into

jeopardize and there is no one to take care of her.

It is now settled that in serious offence as one u/s 376 of the IPC cannot be subject matter of quashment of the proceedings initiated u/s 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the ground of settlement between the accused and the victim. Suffice it to refer the various decisions rendered

by the Hon’ble Apex Court on such aspect, more particularly, in cases of Anita Maria Dias Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2018) 3 SCC

290, Shimbu Vs. State of Haryana reported in (2014) 13 SCC 318 and Parbatbhai Ahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641. However,

this Court cannot overlook the fact that the applicant and the victim girl got married and at present, the victim is pregnant. Such situation is an

exception to the approach to deal with the proceedings initiated u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the basis of settlement between

the victim and the accused and for the pre-dominant purpose of the welfare of the victim to ensure her better future life, it is just and proper for this

Court in exercise of extraordinary inherent powers u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could quash the impugned criminal proceedings

on the ground of settlement between the parties in cases where the accused has married and the complainant and the victim insist for quashment of

impugned criminal proceedings.

In view of the aforementioned aspect, more particularly, in light of the statements made by respondent No.2 and the victim supported by duly

affirmed affidavit placed on record through their learned advocate, this Court is inclined to consider the plea for quashment of the impugned criminal

proceedings, as otherwise, it will detrimentally affect the family life of the victim girl and even the balance and harmony that could be achieved by

them in the resolution of disputes that again be irrecoverably lost.

Since now, the dispute with reference to the impugned F.I.R. is settled and resolved by and between parties which is confirmed by the original

complainant through her learned advocate, the trial would be futile and any further continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of process of

law. Therefore, the impugned F.I.R. is required to be quashed and set aside in view of peculiar facts of the case being exception to the general

principle of law to decline the quashment of proceedings of the nature like present one.

In view of this position, this application is allowed. Impugned F.I.R. being C.R.No.I-96 of 2019 registered with Mahuva Police Station, Bhavnagar

and all other proceedings taken out in pursuance thereof against the present applicant are hereby quashed and set aside. The applicant will produce

certified copy of this order before the concerned learned Sessions Court and also before the investigating officer for necessary action. Rule is made

absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.