PRATIK @ROHIT DAYABHAI CHOVATIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

    R/CR.MA/6519/2026                             ORDER DATED: 08/04/2026




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

    R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
                  FIR/ORDER) NO. 6519 of 2026
==========================================================
              PRATIK @ROHIT DAYABHAI CHOVATIYA & ANR.
                               Versus
                      STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
M S PADALIYA(7406) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR CHINTAN AADESHARA for respondent no. 2
MR LB DABHI APP for the Respondent No. 1
==========================================================

  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

                              Date : 08/04/2026

                               ORAL ORDER


1. Learned Advocate Mr. Chinten M. Adeshra, states that he has
instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and thereby,
seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama. The Registry is directed to
accept the vakalatnama. . Heard learned advocates for the respective
parties.


2. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of note of rule on behalf of
the respective respondents.


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


4. By way of this application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, (hereinafter referred to as “BNSS”), the applicant has


                                  Page 1 of 3
    R/CR.MA/6519/2026                                      ORDER DATED: 08/04/2026




prayed    to     quash   and   set     aside       the   complaint     being         FIR
No.11208057240045 of 2024 registered with Cyber Crime Police Station,
Rajkot City, for the offences under Sections 66(c) of the Information
Technology Act, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.


5. 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 original complainant has also
filed an Affidavit at Annexure – B which is placed on record. In the
Affidavit, the original complainant has categorically stated that the
dispute with the petitioner has been resolved amicably and that he has no
objection, if the present proceedings are quashed and set aside since there
is no surviving grievance between them. The complainant has also stated
that there were no obscene or objectionable photographs were floated on
social media by the present petitioner. The complainant appeared through
virtual mode and admitted the factum of settlement.


6. Having heard learned advocates on both the sides and considering the
facts and circumstances of the case as also the principle 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) Manoj
Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and (v) Narinder
Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67
(SC), considering the facts that the complaint was registered for the
offence under Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act wherein


                                     Page 2 of 3
      R/CR.MA/6519/2026                                                              ORDER DATED: 08/04/2026




it is alleged that the accused created one fake ID in Instagram being
“shyambhut_2677” without the consent of the complainant and viral the
photographs of complainant and his wife and committed the offence,
hence, the complaint was filed. Now the complainant has filed affidavit
stating that settlement took place and no any objectionable material or
photographs are flouted on social media, even the dispute is private in
nature and the petitioner has no past antecedents, therefore, in the opinion
of this Court, the further continuation of criminal proceedings against the
petitioner in relation to the impugned FIR would cause unnecessary
harassment to the petitioner. Further, the continuance of trial pursuant to
the mutual settlement arrived at between the parties would be a futile
exercise. 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 under Section 528 of the Cr.P.C..


7. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned complaint being
FIR No.11208057240045 of 2024 registered with Cyber Crime Police
Station, Rajkot City, as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in
pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioner
herein. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted. If the petitioner
is in jail, the jail authority concerned is directed to release the petitioner
forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case.



                                                                                           (ILESH J. VORA,J)
P.S. JOSHI

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: PALLAV SUBHASHCHANDRA JOSHI(HC00177), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/04/2026 15:39:24




                                                      Page 3 of 3