AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Pathak, the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor, waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1-State of Gujarat. Mr. Sikandar M. Pathan, the learned advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2-original complainant and waives service of notice of rule.
By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners seek to invoke the inherent powers of this court, praying for quashing of the first information report being II C.R. No. 3274 of 2012 lodged before the Kagdapith Police Station of the offence punishable under sections 323, 294(b), 506(2) read with section 114 of the Indian Penal Code on the ground that there has been an amicable settlement between the parties and the respondent No.2-original complainant is no longer desirous of prosecuting the first information report further. The respondent No.2- Dineshbhai Mafatlal Makwana is personally present and he confirms about the settlement arrived at with the accused persons. The respondent No.2- Dineshbhai Mafatlal Makwana is identified by his learned advocate Mr. Sikandar Pathan. Shri Dineshbhai Mafatlal Makwana has also filed an affidavit in vernacular language as regards the compromise took place between him and the accused persons, which is at page 31, Annexure-D to this petition.
Taking into consideration the nature of the dispute and the fact that the parties have now amicably decided to live peacefully, no useful purpose would be served to allow the police to continue with the investigation of the said first information report.
In the result, this application is allowed. The first information report being II C.R. No. 3274 of 2012 lodged before the Kagdapith Police Station is hereby ordered to be quashed. All consequential proceedings arising from the same also stand terminated. Rule is made absolute. The Registry shall accept the Vakalatnama of Mr. Sikandar M. Pathan, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2.
Direct service is permitted.