After Complainant Settles Prawn-Pond Dispute, Gujarat HC Quashes FIR Against Accused񟟿

The petitioner sought to quash an FIR registered at Kavi Police Station, Bharuch, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

The complainant stated that the dispute, arising from a prawn pond and aquaculture activity, had been amicably settled and that he had no objection to quashing the FIR.

He confirmed the settlement before the Court by video conference.

The FIR invoked Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

In considering whether proceedings should be quashed following settlement, the Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, Manoj Sharma v. State, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal.

The Court applied the principle that criminal proceedings may be quashed to secure the ends of justice where, in light of the settlement and circumstances, their continuation would amount to abuse of process and serve no fruitful purpose.

The Court considered the complainant’s affidavit confirming a voluntary settlement, his stated lack of interest in pursuing the case, and his confirmation before the Court that he had no objection to quashing the FIR.

Applying the cited authorities, it concluded that continuing the proceedings in these circumstances would amount to an abuse of process and would serve no fruitful purpose.

Quashing was therefore warranted to secure the ends of justice.