1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Anik S.Timbalia appearing for the applicants-accused and learned APP Ms.Krina P.Calla appearing for the respondent no.1 - State.

2. By way of preferring the present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicants seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court praying to quash and set-aside the First Information Report being C.R. No.11210050211310 of 2021 registered with the Rander Police Station, Surat, for the offences punishable under Sections 387, 342, 323, 504, 506(2), 120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 25(1)(A) and 27 of the Arms Act, as well as the proceedings of the Sessions Case No.150 of 2022 pending before the learned 11th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Surat.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Anik S.Timbalia appearing for the applicants-accused has submitted that there is no evidence against the present applicants-accused, and they have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. He has further submitted that the impugned FIR was filed by the complainant on misconception of facts and, therefore, the complainant has also filed an affidavit dated 11.01.2026, inter alia stating that the matter has been amicably settled, and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed and set-aside qua the present applicants.

4. Learned advocate Mr.Timbalia has, therefore, submitted that since the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and there is no ill-will or grievance against them, the present application may be allowed and the impugned FIR as well as the proceedings of the Sessions Case may be quashed and set-aside qua the present applicants-accused.

5. It is noteworthy that the present applicants-accused had earlier preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.10826 of 2021, which came to be withdrawn vide order dated 14.07.2021 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. Thereafter, the present applicant no.1 had preferred discharge application before the trial court, which came to be rejected. The applicant had, therefore, preferred Criminal Revision Application No.537 of 2023 before this Court, which is still pending.

6. It is also noteworthy that the applicant no.1 Vipulbhai Dahyabhai Gajipara is the kingpin of an organized crime syndicate known as Vipul Gajipara Gang, whereas, the applicant no.2 Altaf Gafurbhai Patel is one of the main members of the said syndicate, and against the applicant no.1 - Vipulbhai Dahyabhai Gajipara, in all, 11 serious offences, including an offence under the provisions of the GUJCTOC Act, have been registered; whereas, 12 serious offences have been registered against the applicant no.2 - Altaf Gafurbhai Patel in the States of Gujarat and Maharashtra. It is alleged that they administer threats to the victims either to kill them or to face dire consequences.

7. In the aforesaid background, this Court has to consider the peculiar facts of the impugned FIR. As per the say of the complainant, on 16.06.2021 at around 12:30 in the midnight, when he had gone to purchase medicines for his wife, along with his friend Asil Fakira, on his motorcycle, at that time, when they reached near Chistiya Tower, two cars intercepted them, and the accused persons, after alighting from the said cars, caught hold of the complainant and drove him towards Ganganagar Society near Jilani Bridge, where, in an open plot, the accused Abdullah Manjra, along with his friends Bhuro Shaikh and Zuber, had demanded Rs.4 crore from the complainant as GST/ransom and threatened to kill him. It is alleged that when the complainant raised his objection, the accused persons abused and threatened him to face dire consequences if the amount in form of protection/extortion money is not paid to them. Furthermore, claiming affiliation with the organized crime syndicate of Altaf Patel and Vipul Gajipara gang, they pointed a firearm at the complainant's abdomen, putting him in fear of imminent death or grievous hurt, and forcibly demanded a sum of Rs.4 crore, and threatened him of fatal consequences on failure to comply. Thereafter, the accused persons committed assault on the complainant and his friend Asil Fakira through physical violence. The victims were subjected to wrongful confinement and detention, deprived of their personal liberty, and were released only at around 2:45 a.m.

8. On bare perusal of the impugned FIR, it prima facie appears that the present applicant no.1 is the leader of the organized crime syndicate and the applicant no.2 is one of its members. Furthermore, it appears that this criminal syndicate is engaging in systematic extortion, whereby they intentionally place the victims in reasonable apprehension of death or grievous hurt to extort, obtain, or compel the delivery of protection money/ransom. By administering direct threats to life or conveying dire consequences, the gang creates a state of duress, compelling the victims to act against their will. This conduct constitutes serious criminal intimidation in order to commit extortion.

9. Considering the seriousness and gravamen of the offences committed by this gang, this Court had directed the learned APP to call for the police report, and in response to same, the learned APP tendered a report dated 05.02.2026 signed by Shri R.J.Chaudhary, Police Inspector, Rander Police Station, Surat city. Considering the same, this Court further directed the Investigating Officer of this case to provide material against the present applicants-accused. It appears that the police has collected CCTV footage, which clearly supports the facts narrated by the complainant in the impugned FIR. The investigation reveals that upon learning of the registration of the impugned FIR, the accused, Abdullah Manjra, disposed of the weapon of offense (pistol) into the Tapi River. Furthermore, a perusal of the police report/charge sheet prima facie establishes the complicity of the applicants-accused in the alleged crime.

10. It further appears that considering the involvement of the present applicants-accused in the alleged offence and their criminal background, this Court had directed the Investigating Officer to provide details of various other offences registered against both the applicants-accused, who are the leader and the active member of the organized crime syndicate. In response to the same, the police had provided the details regarding all the offences registered against both the applicants-accused along with the statements of several witnesses including the secret witnesses. Considering the same, it clearly appears that both the applicants are headstrong persons having criminal background. The evidence further establishes that the accused have perpetrated numerous serious egregious offences, fostering a climate of fear across various areas of Surat city through illicit collaborations with the interstate criminal syndicates from Uttar Pradesh and other states. The record indicates a systemic pattern of witness intimidation and victim coercion, whereby complainants are routinely subjected to threats intended to compel the withdrawal of prosecutions or the execution of compromise affidavits. These allegations are substantiated by the depositions of the protected witnesses, whose testimony corroborates the existence of this ongoing criminal enterprise.

11. It is high time to reiterate that in cases involving serious offenses, the Court cannot mechanically quash an FIR based on a settlement between the parties. Allowing such a course in grave offences would send a pernicious message to the society, fostering a culture of impunity where offenders, emboldened by the prospect of evading the law, may dare to perpetrate such offences repeatedly.

12. Considering the cumulative factors, this Court is of the considered opinion that it cannot overlook or ignore the criminal antecedents of such headstrong offenders, nor the intense terror and atrocities inflicted upon the victims and the society at large. The inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. (or Section 528 BNSS) cannot be invoked to dilute the serious nature of the alleged crimes, as public interest overrides private settlement in such cases.

13. This Court has also considered the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, reported in 1992 (Supp.1) SCC 335, while exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, with regard to quashing of the criminal proceedings.

14. While this Court is mindful of its extraordinary jurisdiction to intervene when the material on record fails to disclose a prima facie case or when the proceedings constitute an abuse of the process of law, the instant case does not warrant such interference. Upon careful scrutiny of the materials on record, a prima facie case against the applicants is evident, and it cannot be concluded that the applicants have been falsely implicated. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution must be afforded the opportunity to prove its case through cogent evidence at trial.

15. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case to exercise inherent discretion to quash the proceedings at the threshold. Consequently, the present application is devoid of any merits and the same is hereby dismissed in limine.