ANKITSINGH AMRENDRASINGH RAJAWAT vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
R/CR.MA/13600/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 13600 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
ANKITSINGH AMRENDRASINGH RAJAWAT & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TAPASWI P RAVAL(10534) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. ROHAN N. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 08/07/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The petitioners before this Court have prayed to quash and set
aside the FIR being CR No.I-74 of 2017, dated 20.05.2017 lodged
before the Meghaninagar Police Station, Ahmedabad, for the offence
punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 506(1) and 114 of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,
along with chargesheet No. 3 of 2020, dated 26.01.2020 as well as
the proceedings of Criminal Case No.23488 of 2020 pending before
the Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, pursuant to the
aforesaid FIR.
Page 1 of 8
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:07:53 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/13600/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2026
2. The notice was issued first, the original complainant refused to
accept it vide order dated 11.06.2024, with a view to give the
complainant one more chance, notice was served to the concerned
police station. Though served, none appears.
3. Rule fix forthwith. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor
waives service of rule.
4. The sum and substance of the FIR is to the effect that all the
petitioners herein commented against her work by alleging that, she
does not know how to do domestic household work and that her
mother has taught her nothing, and that, the accused demanded
dowry again and again, and that, she was beaten and was forcibly
made to drink Dettol by pressing her neck, and even after giving
cash, gold, silver jewelery, motorcycle and four wheel car as dowry
by her father, the accused persons together harassed her and also
perpetrated physical and mental cruelty, and thus, it is alleged that
the offence under Sections 323, 498, 506(1), 114 of the IPC and
Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, have been committed
by the petitioners herein.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Tapaswi Raval would submit that the
complainant has not come with clean hands, inasmuch as a
settlement agreement was already executed on 17.03.2017, wherein
a huge amount of Rs.20,00,000/- had been paid by accused Nos. 1
Page 2 of 8
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:07:53 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/13600/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2026
and 2 as full and final settlement by way of four cheques,
Rs.5,00,000/- each, which have also been honoured. It is after the
said four cheques were honoured, the present complaint is filed with
ulterior motive to extract further money and to harass the petitioners,
inasmuch as, this Court has also quashed and set aside the
application preferred by the present complainant under the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, being
CRMA J No.6081 of 2017.
5.1. Learned advocate would further submit that the allegations qua
the flat are concerned, the said flat is not transferred by the father of
the complainant but has been purchased by the mother-in-law of the
complainant from the developer namely Siddhidhata Nirman Private
Limited, and that some amount is also transferred to the tune of
Rs.95,000/- and Rs.72,000/- in the name of Tomar Rita Mansingh
(mother of the complainant) by the mother-in-law of the complainant
namely Sunita Singh. Thus, the allegations that the flat has been
transferred by her father is falsified.
5.2. Learned advocate would further argue that the allegations are
bereft of any detail as to when such incidence took place, and the
vague allegations are made after settlement was entered into, more
particularly, by obtaining sum to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/-. He
would further submit that non-appearance of the complainant and
refuse to receive the notice would also be an additional factor which
Page 3 of 8
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:07:53 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/13600/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2026
would clearly show the mala fide of the complainant to harass the
present petitioners, and is nothing but an arm-twisting practice by
lodging present FIR to wreck private vengeance.
5.3. Learned advocate would further submit that even looking at
the settlement agreement, all the Stridhan, ornaments, etc., have
been exchanged, and therefore also the allegations as stated in the
FIR are falsified. As far as mental and physical cruelty is concerned,
he would submit that since there are no specific instances, such bare
allegations would not attract the provisions of Section 323 and 498A
of the IPC read with Section 506(1) and 114 of the IPC, and has
thus, argued to allow the present petition.
5.4. Lastly, learned advocate would submit that the allegations
made in the FIR and the material collected during investigation are
so absurd and inherently improbable that based on such material, the
Court will never reach to a conclusion that there is sufficient ground
to proceed against the present petitioners. And has thus prayed to
allow the present petition by quashing the FIR and consequential
proceedings.
6. Per contra , learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Rohan
N. Shah for the State would submit that except for the four
statements of the relatives of the complainant, there are no other
statements of any independent witness to point out the complicity of
Page 4 of 8
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:07:53 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/13600/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2026
the present petitioners, and that the father of the complainant and the
father-in-law of the complainant have entered into a compromise,
and cheques worth Rs.20,00,000/- have been handed over, which
have also been honoured, and under the circumstances argued to
pass orders, in accordance with law.
7. Heard learned advocate for the petitioners and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. This Court has gone
through the papers of the chargesheet as well as FIR. Except for the
four statements which are nothing but reproduction of the contents in
the FIR, there are no independent statements supporting the
allegations. Though, it is a tendency that no third party would
interfere with the matrimonial disputes, however, statement with
regards to any of the relatives of the complainant would have thrown
certain light on the allegations made in the FIR.
8. Be that as it may, the factum of Stridhan been exchanged on
20.02.2017, it is a matter of fact that agreement has been entered
between the father and the father-in-law of the complainant dated
17.03.2017, wherein various items which have been handed back is
also appended, though Rs.15,00,000/- by way of three cheques have
been stated in said agreement, in all Rs.20,00,000/- have been
transferred. More particularly, Rs.15,00,000/- in the name of the
father of the complainant and Rs.5,00,000/- in the name of
complainant. The factum of flat being transferred in the name of the
Page 5 of 8
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:07:53 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/13600/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2026
mother-in-law of the complainant is also falsified from the sale deed
which is placed on record, which reflects that the flat under question
has been purchased by the mother-in-law of the complainant from
the developer. The conduct of the complainant is also required to be
taken into consideration, inasmuch as the wife has lodged the
complaint within 12 days of cheques being honoured worth of
Rs.20,00,000/- by suppressing the factum of settlement, as full and
final settlement arrived between the parties.
9. Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Dalip Singh vs. State
of U.P . reported in (2010) 2 SCC 114, has condemned the practice
of misrepresentation of facts and suppression of material facts, and
has observed as under:
“For many centuries, Indian society cherished two basic
values of life i.e., ‘Satya’ (truth) and ‘Ahimsh’ (non-violence).
Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided the
people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth
constituted an integral part of justice delivery system which
was in vogue in pre-independence era and the people used to
feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the
consequences.
However, post-independence period has seen drastic
changes in our value system. The materialism has over-
shadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has
become so intense that those involved in litigation do not
hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and
suppression of facts in the court proceedings. In last 40 years,
Page 6 of 8
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:07:53 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/13600/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2026
a new creed of litigants has cropped up.”
10. Thus, in light of the aforesaid observations and by suppressing
material facts, by making vague and misleading statements, when an
FIR has been lodged that too also without stating the factum of
Stridhan having received back, coupled with the fact that, at the first
instance, the complainant had ignored to accept the notice and
subsequently despite of service of notice has not remained present
before this Court is nothing but the conduct which requires to be
considered while deciding the present petition, when the veracity of
the FIR itself is under question.
11. Even if the FIR is taken into considerations, all the family
members are roped into. Honorable Supreme Court in the case of
Dara Lakshmi Narayana v. State of Bihar , reported in (2025) 3
SCC 735 wherein it was observed that:
“27. A mere reference to the names of family members in a
criminal case arising out of a matrimonial dispute, without
specific allegations indicating their active involvement should
be nipped in the bud. It is a wellrecognised fact, borne out of
judicial experience, that there is often a tendency to implicate
all the members of the husband’s family when domestic
disputes arise out of a matrimonial discord. Such generalised
and sweeping accusations unsupported by concrete evidence
or particularised allegations cannot form the basis for
criminal prosecution. Courts must exercise caution in such
cases to prevent misuse of legal provisions and the legal
Page 7 of 8
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:07:53 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/13600/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/07/2026
process and avoid unnecessary harassment of innocent family
members. We say so for the reason that while the
complainant/respondent No. 2 has made vague and omnibus
allegations against the accused/appellant herein, she has
failed to justify the same before this Court. Such actions would
create significant divisions and distrust among people, while
also placing an unnecessary strain on the judicial system,
particularly criminal courts.
12. Thus, merely on the basis of the vague allegations, the lodging
of the present FIR would be abuse of process of law, without making
full and fair disclosure of all material facts, more particularly, by
invoking the criminal machinery, is nothing but abuse of process of
law.
13. Hence, the present application succeeds and is hereby allowed.
The FIR being CR No.I-74 of 2017, dated 20.05.2017 lodged before
the Meghaninagar Police Station, Ahmedabad, and all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioners herein, are hereby
quashed and set aside.
14. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(P. M. RAVAL, J)
NITIN MAKWANA
Page 8 of 8
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jul 09 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 10 03:07:53 IST 2026