JAYESHBHAI S/O RAMANBHAI SOLANKI vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Court
Gujarat High Court

R/SCR.A/15638/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240830012026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 15638 of 2026

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
JAYESHBHAI S/O RAMANBHAI SOLANKI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
JAYDEEP H SINDHI(9585) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOOL CHAND TYAGI

Date : 30/10/2026

JUDGMENT
1. Issue rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP accepts service of
rule on behalf of respondent no.1 and waives service. Ms. Devanshi P.
Prajapati, leaned advocate accepts service of rule on behalf of original
complainant-respondent no.2 and waives service.
2. The captioned petition is filed for quashing the FIR being CR
No.11199001251277/2025 registered at City-C Division Police Station,
Bharuch for the offences punishable under Sections 354(A)(1)(2),
354(A)(2), 354(D)(1)(1), 354(D)(1)(2), 354(D)(2), 415, 417, 416, 419,
Page 1 of 5
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 12:31:24 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/15638/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240830012026)
504, and 507 of IPC read with Sections 66(c) and 66(d) of I.T. Act, as
the case may be, as well as all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom qua the present petitioner herein.
3. By way of preferring the captioned petition, the petitioner has
prayed for the following prayers, as set out in para 7 hereinbelow:-
“(A) [A] YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to quash and set aside the
impugned FIR dated 16/11/2025, bearing C.R. No. 11199001251277 of
2025 registered with City-C Division Police Station, Bharuch, for the
offences punishable U/s. 354(Α)(1)(2), 354(1)(2), 354(D)(1)(1), 354(D)(1)
(2). 354(D)(2), 415, 417, 416, 419, 504, 507 of 1.P.C read with sections
66(c), 66(d) of 1.T Act, and consequently all other proceedings arising out
of the aforesaid FIR also be interest of justice; quashed and set aside qua
the present applicant, in the interest of justice;
[B] Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition,
YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to pass order staying further
proceedings of the impugned FIR dated 16/11/2025, bearing C.R. No.
11199001251277 of 2025 registered with City-C Division Police Station,
Bharuch for the offences punishable U/s. 354(A)(1)(2), 354(A)(2), 354(D)
(1)(1), 354(D)(1)(2), 354(D)(2), 415, 417, 416, 419, 504, 507 of 1.P.C read
with sections 66(c), 66(d) of I.T Act, and consequently all other
proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR, also be quashed and set
aside qua the present applicant, and also be stayed;
[C] An ex parte ad interim relief in terms of Para [B] above may kindly be
granted;
[D] Such other and further relief as may be deemed just and necessary in
the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be granted;”
Page 2 of 5
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 12:31:24 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/15638/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240830012026)
4. The respondent no.2 i.e. original complainant appeared in
person.
5. Heard learned counsels for the parties.
6. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the present
petitioner and the complainant have got married and now they have
settled the dispute. He also drawn the attention of this Court to the
marriage certificate placed on record, therefore, he prayed that the FIR
may be quashed.
7. Ms. Devanshi P. Prajapati, learned counsel seeks time to file the
vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.2-original complainant. She
submitted that she has no objection, if the present FIR is quashed qua
present petitioner. She also submitted that the original complainant has
also filed the affidavit on record.
8. Learned APP submitted that in view of the fact that the present
petitioner and the complainant got married, therefore, he has no
objection, if the FIR is quashed qua present petitioner.
9. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsels for
the parties and having gone through the record, the matter has been
amicably settled. Further, the original complainant has filed the affidavit
on record. The original complainant in his affidavit at para nos.1, 2, 3
and 4 has deposed as under:-
“1. I submit and state that I had lodged the impugned FIR dated
16/11/2025, being C.R No. 11824004261744 of 2026, registered with City-
Page 3 of 5
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 12:31:24 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/15638/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240830012026)
C Division Police Station, Bharuch for the offences punishable U/s. 354(A)
(1)(2), 354(A)(2). 354(D)(1)(1), 354(D)(1)(2), 354(D)(2), 415, 417, 416,
419, 504, 507 of 1.P.C read with sections 66(c), 66(d) of I.T Act, against
the present petitioner.
2. I submit and state that we are residing in the same locality and are
known to each other since long time and out of the heat of the moment and
the concerned situation, I had filed the present FIR, but now with the
intervention of mutual friends and family, the matter is amicably settled
between us have no further grievance or grudge against the applicant and
the matter is amicably settled amongst both the parties and hence I don't
want to proceed further with the impugned F.I.R.
3. Therefore, I submit and state that I don't have any objection if the
impugned dated 02/10/2026 being C.R. No. 11199001251277 of 2025
registered with City-C Division thereunder are quashed and set aside.
Police Station, Bharuch, and consequential proceedings
4. I say and submit that I am executing this Affidavit of my own free will,
voluntarily, without any force, pressure, coercion, or undue influence from
any person whatsoever, and further state that I am in a sound state of mind
and not under the influence of any intoxicating substance at the time of
execution of this Affidavit.”
10. Thus, considering the fact that the matter has been amicably
settled and 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; 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.,
Page 4 of 5
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 12:31:24 IST 2026

R/SCR.A/15638/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/10/2026
(GJHC240830012026)
(2014) 6 SCC 466; and State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992
SC 604 , this Court is of the opinion that continuation of the criminal
proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of
the process of law and that no fruitful purpose would be served by
permitting the prosecution to continue. Hence, in order to secure the
ends of justice, the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings
deserve to be quashed and set aside.
11. In the result, the present application is allowed. The FIR being CR
No.11199001251277/2025 registered with City-C Division Police
Station, Dist. Bharuch, as well as all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom, are hereby quashed and set aside qua the present petitioner.
Direct service is permitted.
12. Registry is directed to accept the vakalatnama of Ms. Devanshi
P. Prajapati, learned counsel for the original complainant.
(MOOL CHAND TYAGI, J)
Harshit
Page 5 of 5
Uploaded by MR.HARSHIT SANCHETI (HCD0070) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 12:31:24 IST 2026