Oral Order

1. Learned advocate Mr. Mahesh Patel, states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and thereby, seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama, which is granted. He is permitted to file his appearance and Registry to accept the same.

2. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

3. Rule. Learned APP Ms. Shah as also learned advocate Mr. Patel, waive service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respective respondents.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and since it is jointly stated at the bar by learned advocates on both the sides that the dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

5. By way of this application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') the applicants have prayed to quash and set aside the impugned FIR being C.R.No.11191014260050 of 2026 registered with Ellisbridge Police Station, District - Ahmedabad City for the offences punishable under Sections 304(2), 238, 324(4), 351(2), 296(b) and 189(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

6. Learned advocates for the respective parties submitted that during the pendency of proceedings, the parties have settled the dispute amicably and pursuant to such mutual settlement, the original complainant has also filed an Affidavit dated 23.04.2026, which is already annexed with the petition.

          6.1 At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Patel has identified the original complainant, who is present before the Court and confirmed that he has no objection, if the impugned FIR may be quashed and set aside by this Court. The original complainant admits that he has voluntarily filed the affidavit in the matter for the said cause. In the Affidavit, the original complainant has categorically stated that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved.

7. Learned APP Ms. Shah, would also unable to show any antecedents of the applicants. Moreover, learned advocate for the applicants would draw the attention of this Court that the applicants have preferred the anticipatory bail application, wherein the Investigating Officer has filed the affidavit and made it clear that the applicants have no any other antecedents.

8. Having heard learned advocates on both the sides and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly the issue is commercial in nature, as also the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of - (i) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, (ii) Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, (iii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, (iv) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and (v) Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), in the opinion of this Court, the further continuation of criminal proceedings against the applicant in relation to the impugned FIR would cause unnecessary harassment to the applicant. Further, the continuance of trial pursuant to the mutual settlement arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to quash and set aside the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof under Section 528 of the BNSS.

9. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned FIR being C.R.No.11191014260050 of 2026 registered with Ellisbridge Police Station, District - Ahmedabad City as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants herein. If the applicants are in jail, the jail authority concerned is directed to release the applicants forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case.

10. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.