RAJENDRABHAI KANUBHAI RABARIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

      R/CR.MA/2784/2026                           ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 2784
                           of 2026

==========================================================
                   RAJENDRABHAI KANUBHAI RABARI & ORS.
                                 Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MS. ASMITA PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS

                             Date : 24/02/2026

                              ORAL ORDER


1.      Learned advocate Mr. Abhishek Khuman appears and
submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the
respondent no.2 – original complainant. He is permitted to                  le
his appearance. Registry shall accept his vakalatnama.


2.      By way of preferring the present application under Section
528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the
applicants-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this
Court, praying to quash and set-aside the First Information
Report No. 11197054260065 of 2026 registered with the
Varnama Police Station, Vadodara Rural, for the o6ences
punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as all
other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.


                                 Page 1 of 5
     R/CR.MA/2784/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026




3.     Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant is
personally present before this Court and has                led an a6idavit.
The same is ordered to be taken on record. In the said a6idavit,
the complainant has categorically stated that with the
intervention of the friends, family members and community
people, the dispute has been amicably resolved with the
applicants 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 nal disposal.


5.     RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Ms. Asmita Patel
waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.1 – State and learned advocate Mr. Abshishek
Khuman waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.2 – complainant.


6.     Learned           advocate   for    the    applicants-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.




                                    Page 2 of 5
     R/CR.MA/2784/2026                               ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026




7.       The complainant, who is personally present in the Court,
has categorically stated before this Court that she 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 applicants-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 a6idavit                led by the
complainant – Bhikhiben wd/o Jashbhai Babarbhai Baria, read
thus :

       “1.    Being complainant of the present case, I'm aware about
       the facts and circumstances of the case.

       2.     I've gone through the contents of the averment of above
       stated application led by the applicants, and I reiterate the
       same.

       3.     I'm complainant of the F.I.R led before Varnama Police
       station, Vadodara Rural being CR. No.1-11197054260065 of
       2026 against the applicant for the o.enses under sections
       336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) and 54 of Bhartiya Nyay
       Sanhita.

       4.    I say that as stated in the petition, the matter is amicably
       and peaceful resolved with regard to document in question and
       for which the document is to be cancelled and accordingly
       Special Civil Suit no. 16 of 2026 is also led.

       5.     I say and submit that as in fact, as agreed about
       cancellation of document, therefore the dispute no longer exists
       and same is pertains to private civil dispute amicably and
       peacefully, under this circumstances, I urges the Hon'ble Court
       to accept the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner. Copy of
       SPCS No. 16 of 2026 and comprise agreement (karardad) is
       attached herewith.


       6.       I say and submit that the dispute between myself and


                                  Page 3 of 5
     R/CR.MA/2784/2026                            ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026




       applicant-accused is settled now and we have buried our
       grievances, and it was decided to conclude the proceedings, I,
       therefore humbly urges the Hon'ble Court to terminate the
       proceeding as prayed for by the applicant by quashing and
       setting aside the F.I.R being CR No. I-11197054260065 of 2026
        led before Varnama Police station, Vadodara Rural and further
       proceedings arising thereof, I've no objection.

       7.     I'm ling this a.idavit on my free will and wish without
       there being any undue pressure.”



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 applicants-accused
would be nothing but unnecessary harassment to the applicants-
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


                                Page 4 of 5
          R/CR.MA/2784/2026                                                ORDER DATED: 24/02/2026




    required to be quashed and set-aside in exercise of the powers
    conferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
    Sanhita, 2023.


    10.      In the result, the application is allowed. The First
    Information Report No. 11197054260065 of 2026 registered
    with the Varnama Police Station, Vadodara Rural, for the
    o6ences punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2),
    61(2) and 54 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
    applicants 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 25/02/2026 15:28:22




                                                  Page 5 of 5