Oral Order

1. The present application is preferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing and setting aside of the complaint registered as Criminal Case No. 1918 of 2012 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Viramgam, and the order passed by the learned Magistrate issuing process under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. At the outset, it is submitted that accused No. 1, namely Mehta Mohanbhai Meghjibhai, has expired during the pendency of the present application and therefore the proceedings qua the said accused stand abated. Accused No. 2, namely Dhartiben Keyurbhai Joshi, is the applicant in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 9676 of 2013 and accused No. 3, namely Keyurbhai Hemantbhai Joshi, is the applicant in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 10538 of 2013. It emerges from the record that the offences alleged in the complaint arise out of a private dispute and pertain to non-payment of compensation. On the basis of the allegations made in the complaint, the learned Magistrate had issued process.

3. Learned advocates appearing for the respective parties submitted that the dispute between the parties has now been amicably settled. In support thereof, an affidavit of the legal heirs of the original complainant, namely Utamkumar Arjanbhai and Himanshukumar Arjanbhai (sons of the complainant) and Ramilaben Arjanbhai (wife of the complainant), has been placed on record. As per the said affidavit, the parties have resolved the dispute and the legal heirs of the complainant have given their consent for quashing of the complaint. Himanshubhai Arjanbhai, son of the complainant, is personally present before this Court and has confirmed the factum of settlement between the parties

4. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application as well as taking into consideration the decisions rendered by the Apex Court in the cases of 'Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.', reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, 'Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab', reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, 'Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.', reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, 'Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors.', reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and 'Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.', reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), it appears that further continuation of criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicant would be unnecessary harassment to the applicant. I have also considered the latest decision of the Apex Court in the case of 'Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat', Criminal Appeal No.1723 of 2017, dated 4.10.2017 and the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in the said decision, particularly Paragraph-15, thereof. Considering the nature of disputes between the parties which are all private in nature, I am of the opinion that the matter requires consideration. It appears that the trial would be futile and further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code.

5. In view of the above, the Criminal Case No. 1918 of 2012, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Viramgam is quashed. Accordingly, all the consequential proceedings are hereby quashed and set aside.

6. The demand draft has been handed over in Court and the same has been duly acknowledged by the son of the complainant, who is present before this Court. The affidavit in that regard is directed to be taken on record.