- (1.)HEARD Mr.Tejas Barot, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, Ms.Moxa Thakkar, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the StateRespondent No.1 and Mr.Ekant G. Ahuja, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2.
(2.)BY way of the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants have prayed for quashing and setting aside F.I.R. being C.R. No.I52/2013 registered with Vastrapur Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offences punishable under Section 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
Mr.Tejas Barot, learned counsel appearing for the applicants has drawn attention to this court to the factual aspects arising out of this application. He predominantly submits that the applicants and brother of first informant had arisen certain misunderstanding on the date of which the first informant lodged the complaint took the motorbike belonging to the first informant only for joy ride and after a long time, the impugned F.I.R. have been lodged. He further submits that parties have amicably resolved the dispute and the allegations made in the F.I.R. Have no foundation and as such, all the articles belonging to the first informant have duly returned by the applicants. It is also submitted that motorbike of the first informant and Muddmal were seized by the police in pursuant to the criminal complaint filed by the first informant, for which, there is no fault on the part of the applicants. Respondent No2 first informant has also filed affidavit dated 28.2.2013 and stated that the applicants and himself are belonged to the same locality and after filing of the F.I.R., persons of the locality gathered to resolve the dispute and further, declared that they have amicably resolved the dispute. Mr.Barot, learned advocate appearing for the applicants further submits that any further continuation of the criminal proceedings pursuant to the impugned F.I.R. would be harassment to the applicants and, therefore, trial would be futile and would amount to abuse of process of law and Court. Hence, the present application is filed for quashing and setting aside the impugned F.I.R. Mr.Barot, learned advocate appearing for the applicants therefore submits that this Court may be allowed by this Court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

(3.)THIS Court (Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Thaker), while admitting the matter on 6.3.2013, has passed the following order:
"1. Heard Mr. Barot, learned advocate for petitioners and learned APP. 2. In present petition the petitioners have prayed that FIR being C.R.No.I52/2013 filed before the Vastrapur Police Station may be quashed. 3. The alleged offence is under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of IPC. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the alleged dispute is purely of personal nature and the petitioners and respondent No.2 have settled the dispute. So as to justify the said submission, learned counsel for petitioner relied on an affidavit dated 28.02.2013 at AnnexureB page 12. 5. Mr. Ahuja, learned advocate has appeared and submitted that he has received instructions to appear on behalf of respondent No.2 and that he will enter his appearance before 7 th March 2013. He has confirmed the submission by learned counsel for petitioners that the dispute has been settled. Learned counsel also submitted that now the respondent does not want to prosecute the FIR further in view of the settlement. 6. In view of the said submission, below mentioned order is passed: Rule returnable on 13th March 2013. It will be open to the learned advocates to request the Honble Court where the final hearing of the petition under Section 482 of the Code are assigned as per present roster, for early hearing of the petition. In the meanwhile, adinterim relief in terms of para 7(B) is granted until 13th March 2013. In addition to normal mode of service through office, direct service is permitted."