JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)BY way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the applicant,
who is working as Talati in the revenue services of
the State of Gujarat has prayed for quashing the
impugned FIR being C.R. No.I-157/2006 registered with
Vijapur Police Station and the further proceedings
initiated in pursuance to the said FIR for the
alleged offences under sections 465, 467, 471, 409 &
114 of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
(2.)HEARD Mr. Shakti Jadeja for Mr. P.P.Majmudar, learned Advocate for applicant, Ms. Moxa Thakkar,
learned APP. for respondent State and Mr. Pratik
Jasani, learned Advocate for first informant
respondent no.2.
This Court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M.Thaker) on 30.01.2013 has passed the following
order:
"1. Heard Mr. P.P. Majmudar, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Jani, learned APP for the respondent State. 2. Though respondent has not entered appearance, affidavit dated 17.10.2012 is filed by respondent No.2 i.e. original complainant. 3. In present petition the petitioner has prayed that:- "8(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to call for the records and proceedings of F.I.R. Being registered as C.R. No. I-157/2006 with Vijapur Police Station and further be pleased to quash the impugned F.I.R. and the proceedings arising therefrom, in the interest of justice as the dispute between the parties has been amicable settled; (B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the further proceedings of F.I.R. being registered as C.R. No. I-157/2006 with Vijapur Police Station and the proceedings arising therefrom, pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, in the interest of justice; (C)........."
4. According to the F.I.R. the alleged offence is under Sections 465, 467, 471, 409 and 114 of Indian Penal Code. 5. At this stage, Mr. Jasani, learned advocate has appeared and submitted that he has received instruction to appear for respondent No.2 i.e. original complainant. He further submitted that he will enter his appearance today. 6. Learned advocates for petitioner and respondent have jointly submitted that dispute is settled between the parties and the affidavit dated 17.10.2012 made by one Mr. Ramabhai Sendhabhai Patel is placed on record. Mr. Jasani, learned advocate for respondent No.2 has identified his signature. 7. In this view of the matter below mentioned order is passed:- Rule. Ad-interim relief in terms of paragraph No.8(B). Notice as to interim relief returnable on 25.2.2013."
(3.)AT the outset it is made clear that the name of the applicant as mentioned in the application is
Kanaiyalal Dwarkadas Patel whereas in the impugned
FIR it is mentioned as "Kanubhai D. Patel". Learned
Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective
parties have stated before this Court that Kanaiyalal
Dwarkadas Patel and Kanubhai Dwarkadas Patel is one
person and the same is also indicative from the
chargesheet at page no.21 of the Paper-book wherein
it is mentioned as " Patel Kanaiyalal @ Kanubhai
Dwarkadas Patel".
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.