MUNA @ MUKESHBHAI GIGABHAI FANGALIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/SCR.A/7735/2026                           ORDER DATED: 12/06/2026




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


     R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT
                QUASHING) NO. 7735 of 2026

================================================
  MUNA @ MUKESHBHAI GIGABHAI FANGALIYA & ANR.
                          Versus
             STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================
Appearance:
MR N P PANDYA(11241) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR.SHATRUGHN S SONI(17589) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR KM ANTANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                          Date : 12/06/2026

                           ORAL ORDER


1.     Heard, learned advocates for the respective parties.


2.     Rule. The learned advocates for the respective respondents
waive service.


3.     Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and since
it is jointly stated at bar by the learned advocates for the respective
parties that the dispute between the parties has been resolved
amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith.




                               Page 1 of 4
     R/SCR.A/7735/2026                          ORDER DATED: 12/06/2026




4.     By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
r/w. Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(BNSS), the petitioners – original accused Nos. 7 and 8 have
prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being CR No.
11208037260349 of 2026, registered with Kuvadva Road Police
Station, Rajkot City for the offences punishable under Sections
109(1), 118(1), 115(1), 351(3), 189(2), 190, 191(2) and 191(3) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 135(1) of the GP
Act and to quash all other consequential proceedings arising
therefrom.


5.     The learned advocates for the respective parties submitted
that during the pendency of proceedings, the parties have settled
the dispute amicably and pursuant to such mutual settlement, the
de facto complainant has also filed an Affidavit, which is on record.
In the Affidavit, the de facto complainant has categorically stated
that the dispute with the petitioners has been resolved amicably
and he has no objection if the criminal proceedings are quashed
and set aside since there is no surviving grievance between them.


6.     The de facto complainant has unequivocally stated that he has
entered into compromise with the accused and they have amicably
settled the dispute and that, he has no objection to quash the FIR
that is registered against the petitioners.


7.     It is apt here to consider whether the powers conferred by


                                Page 2 of 4
     R/SCR.A/7735/2026                          ORDER DATED: 12/06/2026




the High Court under Section 528 of the BNSS are warranted. It is
true that the powers under Section 528 of the BNSS are very wide
and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its
exercise. The Court must be careful to see that its decision in
exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent
power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution.
The High Court being the highest Court of a State should normally
refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire
facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not
been collected and produced before the Court and the issues
involved, whether factual or legal, are of magnitude and cannot be
seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. Of
course, no hard-and-fast rule can be laid down in regard to cases
in which the High Court will exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction
of quashing the proceeding at any stage as held by the Apex Court
in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation v. Ravi Shankar
Srivastava, IAS & Anr., reported in AIR 2006 SC 2872.


8.     Having heard learned advocates on both the sides and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the
principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of (i) Gian
Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303,
(ii) Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4
SCC 582, (iii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
& Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, (iv) Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs.
State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC) as also


                              Page 3 of 4
         R/SCR.A/7735/2026                                                            ORDER DATED: 12/06/2026




  considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is
  resolved amicably and complainant has no objection if the FIR is
  quashed, in the opinion of this Court, the continuation of criminal
  proceedings against the present petitioners would be an exercise in
  futility and abuse of process of law, more particularly, considering
  the fact as asserted that the petitioners were trying to intervene
  and resolve the dispute in good faith, however, because of
  commotion took place, FIR came to be registered, however, now,
  the cloud is clear. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, it would be
  appropriate to quash and set aside the impugned FIR and all
  consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof.


  9.         In fine, the petition is allowed. The impugned FIR, as referred
  to herein above, as well as all consequential proceedings initiated
  in pursuance thereof, are hereby quashed and set aside qua the
  petitioners herein – original accused Nos. 7 and 8.


  9.1        Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service
  is permitted.


                                                                                             [ P. M. Raval, J. ]
  hiren/MRMJ401tss12626




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: HIREN VIRENDRABHAI MER(HC00351), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 12/06/2026 14:57:42


                                                        Page 4 of 4