- (1.) RULE. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Ms. M.L. Shah and learned advocate, Mr.Ashok N. Parmar, waive service of rule on behalf of the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 respectively.
(2.) THE present application under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing of FIR registered as I.C.R.No.13 of 2011 before Bavla Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC in pursuance of complaint filed by the respondent No.1-complainant. Heard learned advocate, Mr.Girish D. Chavda for the petitioner, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Ms. M. L. Shah for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and learned advocate Mr.Ashok N. Parmar, for the respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 alongwith his wife, who are parents of victim girl, are present before the Court. They have stated before the Court that engagement has taken place between present petitioner alongwith their daughter. They have also stated before the Court that marriage will take place between present petitioner alongwith their daughter and so now they have no grievance against the present petitioner as their daughter is going to marry with present petitioner.
(3.) IT is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that matter is settled between the parties and now respondent No.1 ori. complainant has no grievance against the present petitioner and requests to quash the complaint. If criminal proceedings continues it will be a harassment to the present petitioner and it will create hurdle in marriage, which will take place between the present petitioner and victim girl. It is submitted by the original complainant respondent No.1 that the matter is amicably settled between the parties. An Affidavit dated 10.3.2011 of respondent No.1 ori. complainant and an affidavit of mother of victim girl dated 10.3.2011 to this effect is also placed on record as Annexure-C and Annexure-D. The complainant has submitted that the matter is settled between the parties and the settlement is not under any duress. It is further submitted that now he has no grievance against the petitioner.;