Kidnapping Victim Says Accused Had No Role; Gujarat HC Quashes Case Against Him After Settlement

The petitioner sought quashing of FIR I-C.R. No. 70 of 2016, registered at Aslali Police Station for offences under Sections 364A, 365, 385, 387 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, and the resulting Sessions Case No. 91 of 2020.

The petitioner submitted that the dispute had been amicably settled and that the FIR against a co-accused had previously been quashed.

The victim and the legal representatives of the deceased original complainant filed affidavits confirming the settlement and stating that they had no objection to quashing; the victim also stated that the petitioner had no role in the offence.

The State opposed the petition, citing the seriousness of the allegations.

The Court considered the offences alleged under Sections 364A, 365, 385 and 387 read with Section 120B of the IPC.

In considering quashing on the basis of settlement, it 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; Manoj Sharma v. State; Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466; and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604.

Applying those authorities, the Court assessed whether, in the circumstances of this case, continuing the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of process and whether quashing was warranted to secure the ends of justice.

The Court considered the settlement affidavits and the victim’s and complainant’s legal representatives’ statements before it confirming their consent to quashing.

Although the State emphasised the seriousness of the allegations, the Court concluded that the settlement and the circumstances on record meant that continuing the prosecution would amount to an abuse of process and serve no fruitful purpose. It therefore found quashing appropriate to secure the ends of justice.