Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Gujarat High Court Quashes FIR in Compromise Settlement: "A Word Uttered in a Fit of Anger Cannot be Instigation"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Gujarat High Court, presided over by Justice J. C. Doshi, has quashed an FIR registered under Sections 306, 498A, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against Rajeshbhai Kurbahnbhai Hathila. The decision, dated November 6, 2023, marks a pivotal moment in understanding the nuances of legal proceedings in cases of alleged instigation of suicide.

The Court, in its wisdom, emphasized, "A word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation." This observation underscores the Court's approach in distinguishing between actual instigation and mere expressions of anger or frustration.

The FIR in question was registered at the Limkheda Police Station, Dahod, with the original complainant and relatives of the deceased arriving at an amicable settlement with the accused. The Court noted that this settlement was made voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence. The learned advocate Mr. Vipul Sundesha, representing the original complainant, confirmed the voluntariness of this settlement in court.

Justice Doshi cited several precedents, including the landmark cases of Chitresh Kumar Chopra vs. State of NCT of Delhi and B S Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana, to reinforce the principle that criminal proceedings can be quashed in private disputes following a mutual resolution, even if the offences are non-compoundable.

While the learned APP raised objections based on the seriousness of the crime, particularly referencing the case of Daxaben vs. State of Gujarat, the Court found these objections to be insufficient grounds to continue the proceedings. The Court's decision hinged on the lack of evidence for instigation as defined under Section 306 of the IPC.

This ruling is a significant step in understanding the complexities of legal cases involving allegations of instigation to suicide. It also highlights the importance of context and intention behind words or actions alleged to have led to such drastic outcomes.

The Court concluded by ordering the quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings, thereby directing the release of the accused if not required in any other case. This judgement is expected to set a precedent in cases where the nuances of instigation and the impact of settlements are at the forefront of legal discussions.

Decided on : 06-11-2023

RAJESHBHAI KURBANBHAI HATHILA  VS STATE OF GUJARAT

Latest Legal News