ASHVINBHAI SOMABHAI KHANT vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Court
Gujarat High Court

R/SCR.A/11223/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240558162023)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 11223 of 2023
==========================================================
ASHVINBHAI SOMABHAI KHANT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. BHAVNA D ACHARYA(6406) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SAHIL M. THAKOR for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MS DHWANI TRIPATHI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

Date : 29/10/2026

JUDGMENT
Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule for the
respondent State and learned advocate Mr.Thakor for
respondent Nos.2 and 3.
1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ”the Code”),
the petitioners have prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR
being C.R.No.11196017220603 registered with Panigate Police
Station, Vadodara City, for the offences punishable under
Sections 363, 366, of the IPC as well as all other consequential
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the petitioners
herein.
2. When the matter is called out today, the complainant and
victim are present before the Court through learned advocate Mr.
Sahil B. Thakor, who has instructions to appear for them.
Learned advocate for the complainant and the victim has
Page 1 of 4
Uploaded by SHEKHAR P. BARVE(HC00200) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 30 00:02:17 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/11223/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240558162023)
placed on record affidavits filed by the complainant as well as the
victim. In the affidavit, the complainant has categorically stated
that the dispute between the parties are now resolved and there
is no ill-will and grievance amongst the parties. The daughter of
the complainant, who is present in the Court, is a major and
stated before the Court that she has no objection, if the FIR is
quashed. The complainant also has no objection if the FIR is
quashed. Said affidavits are taken on record. Relevant para is 2,
which reads as under:-
“I state and submit that the amicable settlement has been
arrived at between my mother and the petitioner. After the
registration of the impugned FIR against the petitioner, my
family members had realized that due to several objections
against the love affair between me and the petitioner at the
relevant point of time and misunderstandings, in haste, the
said FIR is filed by my mother. Thus, she does not want to
pursue with the present FIR as it would affect my happy and
satisfied married life as I already married with the petitioner
on 16.03.2023. The copy of marriage certificate is already
annexed with the petition and from the said wedlock, we are
having one son namely, “Priyansh” whose date of birth is
7.12.2023.”
Moreover, it also comes on record that the victim married
to the petitioner and now, they are settled in their married life.
The marriage certificate is also placed on record. Thus, sending
the petitioners to face the trial is a futile exercise.
3. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, settlement affidavit as also taking
into consideration the decisions rendered in Gian Singh Vs.
State of Punjab & Anr., (2012) 10 SCC 303; Madan
Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582;
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by SHEKHAR P. BARVE(HC00200) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 30 00:02:17 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/11223/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240558162023)
Nikhil Merchant Vs. CBI & Anr., 2009 (1) GLH 31; Manoj
Sharma Vs. State & Ors., 2009 (1) GLH 190; Narinder
Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2014) 6 SCC
466; and State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC
604 , in opinion of this Court, since parties have buried their
dispute, the dispute which is already buried need not to be
allowed to roll further. 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.
4. In the case of State of Haryana Vs. B.Bhajanlal & ors., AIR
1992 SC 604, the Hon’ble Apex Court summed up the
proposition of law, which reads as under:-
“(1) Where the allegations made in the First Information
Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their
face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima
facie constitute any offence or make out a case against
the accused.
(2) Where the allegations ins the F.I.R. and other
materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose
a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police
officers under S.156(1) of the Code except under an order
of a Magistrate within the purview of S.155(2) of the code.
(3) Where, the uncontroverted allegations made in the
F.I.R. or complaint and the evidence collected in support of
the same donot disclose the commission of any offence
and make out the case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute a
cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable
offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer
without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under
Page 3 of 4
Uploaded by SHEKHAR P. BARVE(HC00200) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 30 00:02:17 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/11223/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240558162023)
S.155(2) of the Code.
(5) Whether, the allegations made in the F.I.R. or
complaint are sO absurd and inherently improbable on
the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a
just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where, there is an express legal bare engrafted in any
of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under
which a criminal proceeding is instituted) toi the
institution and/or where there is a specific provision in
the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious
redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended
with malafide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously
instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance
on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private
and personal grudge."
4.1 The findings of the Hon’ble Apex Court in para 1,3 and 7
are attracted in the present case. In view of above, present
petition deserves consideration.
5. In the result, the application is allowed. The proceedings of
FIR being C.R.No.11196017220603 registered with Panigate
Police Station, Vadodara City as well as all other consequential
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the petitioners
herein are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule made absolute to
the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SHEKHAR P. BARVE
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by SHEKHAR P. BARVE(HC00200) on Thu Oct 29 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 30 00:02:17 IST 2026