After Complainant Confirms Settlement, Gujarat HC Quashes Forgery FIR And Proceedings Against Two Accused

The petitioners sought quashing of FIR I-C.R. No. 38 of 2019, registered at Bagodara Police Station for offences under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and the resulting charge-sheet and proceedings, including Criminal Case No. 40 of 2020.

The complainant filed an affidavit stating that the dispute had been amicably settled, that no grievance remained, and that she had no objection to quashing; she confirmed the settlement before the Court.

The State opposed the application, relying on the seriousness of the allegations.

The Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582; Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, 2009 (1) GLH 31; Manoj Sharma v. State, 2009 (1) GLH 190; Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466; and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604, as authorities relevant to quashing criminal proceedings.

The principle applied was that, where the Court considers the settlement and circumstances to make continuation of proceedings an abuse of process and finds that prosecution would serve no fruitful purpose, proceedings may be quashed to secure the ends of justice.

The FIR invoked IPC Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B.

The Court considered the complainant’s affidavit and her confirmation in person that the dispute had been settled and that she had no objection to quashing.

Applying the cited authorities, it concluded that continuation of the proceedings despite the settlement would amount to an abuse of process and would serve no fruitful purpose.

Although the State objected on the basis of the seriousness of the allegations, the Court allowed the application after considering the settlement and the cited precedents.