MEHULBHAI SHAMBHUBHAI DAFDAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

      R/CR.MA/24868/2025                              ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO.
                           24868 of 2025

==========================================================
                           MAHULBHAI SHAMBHUBHAI DAFDA
                                      Versus
                             STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AMIT N KATHIRIYA(11930) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS

                                  Date : 07/01/2026

                                   ORAL ORDER


1.       Learned advocate Mr. Mehul S. Padaliya appears and
submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the
respondent no.2 – original complainant. Registry shall accept
his vakalatnama.


2.       By way of preferring the present application under Section
528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the
applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this
Court, praying to quash and set-aside the First Information
Report No. 11208053250982 of 2025 registered with the Rajkot
Taluka Police Station, District Rajkot City, for the offences
punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, as well as all other consequential proceedings
arising pursuant thereto.


                                      Page 1 of 5
     R/CR.MA/24868/2025                        ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026




3.      Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant,
who is personally present before this Court, has produced his
identity proof. The same is ordered to be taken on record. The
complainant has also filed an affidavit, which is annexed at
Annexure ‘B’ to the application. The complainant has admitted
the contents of the said affidavit. He has stated that earlier he
had received Rs. 50,000/- from the applicant, and thereafter, on
05.01.2026, he had received Rs. 8,85,000/- from the applicant.
He has further stated that since the matter has been settled
between the parties, he does not want to prosecute further in
the case. In the affidavit, the complainant has categorically
stated that with the intervention of the friends, family members
and community people, the dispute between the parties has
been amicably resolved and there is no ill-will or any grievance
amongst them.


4.      Considering the issue involved in the present application
as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been
amicably resolved between the parties, with the consent of the
learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the
present application is taken up for final disposal.


5.      RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Manan
Maheta waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.1 – State and learned advocate Mr. Mehul S.
Padaliya waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the


                              Page 2 of 5
     R/CR.MA/24868/2025                              ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026




respondent no.2 – complainant.


6.      Learned advocate for the applicant-accused has submitted
that since the dispute has been amicably resolved between the
parties, the application may be allowed and the impugned FIR
may be quashed and set-aside.


7.      The complainant, who is personally present in the Court,
has categorically stated before this Court that he has no
objection if the application is allowed and the FIR is quashed
and set-aside. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that sending
the applicant-accused to face the trial would be nothing but a
futile exercise and would amount to abuse of process of law.


8.      The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the
complainant – Kalpeshbhai Madhavjibhai Khunt, read thus :

       “2. I have gone through the application filed by the Applicant and
       I say that the alleged incident was occurred due to the
       misunderstanding on the part of accused / applicant and
       therefore I have filed this complaint.

       3. Subsequently, the applicant / accused realised his mistakes.
       We are having brother like relations as we are old friends. I
       received entire money from the present applicant. Therefore
       elder family members intervened in the issue and we decided to
       settle the issue. Now, we are living like brothers in the same
       vicinity and having no grievance or grudge regarding the
       incident.

       4. I say that I have no objection if the FIR which was registered
       by me at Rajkot Taluka Police Station Dist. Rajkot City vide C.R.
       No. 11208053250982 of 2025 for the offence u/s 318(4) of
       Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. 2023 on dated 01.10.2025 is quashed
       and prayer made by the applicant in the present application is


                                  Page 3 of 5
     R/CR.MA/24868/2025                           ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026




       granted by this Hon'ble court.

       5. I say that due to the remorse admitted by the
       accused/applicant and since we are known to each other, we
       have decided to compromise with the applicant. Neither I have
       been threatened nor been enticed by any person including the
       accused /applicant for compromise. ”



9.      Having heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties as well as considering the facts and
circumstances arising out of the present application and taking
into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2012) 10
SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, reported
in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation & Another, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 31, Manoj
Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 190,
and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab &
Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as well as State
of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it
appears that further continuation of the criminal proceedings in
relation to the impugned FIR against the applicant-accused
would be nothing but unnecessary harassment to the applicant-
accused. It further appears that the trial would be a futile
exercise and continuing further with the proceedings pursuant
to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law.
Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR and all
other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are
required to be quashed and set-aside in exercise of the powers



                                  Page 4 of 5
          R/CR.MA/24868/2025                                               ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026




    conferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
    Sanhita, 2023.


    10.      In the result, the application is allowed. The proceedings
    of the First Information Report No. 11208053250982 of 2025
    registered with the Rajkot Taluka Police Station, District Rajkot
    City, for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the
    Bharatiya         Nyaya         Sanhita,         2023,       as     well       as     all    other
    consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby
    ordered to be quashed and set-aside, qua the present applicant
    only.


    11.      Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.



                                                                               (VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
    AMAR SINGH



Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: AMAR SINGH(HC01081), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/01/2026 10:42:27




                                                 Page 5 of 5