SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Unknown vs State Of Punjab on 10 January, 2019

Cr.MMO No. 301 of 2018

10.1.2019 Present: Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. S.C. Sharma, Mr. Dinesh Thakur and Mr. Sanjeev


Sood, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Amit

Dhumal, Deputy Advocate General, for the State.

Mr. M.L. Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

By way of instant petition filed under Section 482

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prayer has been made on

behalf of the petitioners for quashing of the FIR No.12 of 2018,

dated 26.1.2018, under Section 376 of IPC and Section 4 of the

POCSO Act, registered at P.S. Dalhousie, District Chamba, H.P.,

as well as consequent proceedings pending in the Court of the

learned Sessions Judge Chamba, H.P., on the ground that

during the pendency of the trial, parties have agreed to

resolve their dispute amicably.

2. FIR detailed herein above came to be lodged at

the behest of Petitioner No.1 (Smt. Asha Devi), who alleged

that respondent No.2 namely Bunty Kumar (accused), allured

her minor daughter (petitioner No.2), and then sexually

assaulted her against her wishes. She also alleged in the

complaint filed by her to the police, which subsequently

culminated into FIR, that on account of illegal act committed

by respondent No.2-accused, her minor daughter namely

Anjana Devi i.e. petitioner No.2, became pregnant and as

such, case be registered against respondent No.2. On the

basis of aforesaid complaint, formal FIR as referred herein

above, came to be lodged against respondent No.2 accused

on 26.1.2018 and since then, he is behind bars. It may be

11/01/2019 23:08:18 :::HCHP
noticed that after lodging of aforesaid FIR, petitioner No.2

delivered a child, who is now 7 months old. Police after


completion of investigation, presented challan in the Court of

learned Sessions Judge, District Chamba, which is pending


3. During the pendency of the proceedings before

the learned Sessions Judge, Chamba, parties have agreed

inter-se them to resolve their dispute amicably, wherein they

decided to solemnize marriage of petitioner and respondent

No.2. Mr. K.B. Khajuria, learned counsel for the petitioners, also

placed on record certified copies of statement made by the

prosecutrix (petitioner No.2,) before the learned Court below,

to demonstrate that she has not supported the case of the

prosecution and as such, no fruitful purpose would be served in

case, proceedings pending before the court below are

allowed to continue, rather, life of the petitioner No.2 and

respondent-accused would be ruined. He further contended

that since petitioner No.2 has already delivered a child, who is

not 7 months old, and it would be in the interest of petitioner

No.2 and responden-accused, if they are allowed to solemnize

the marriage.

4. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that by

way of FIR as referred herein above, which is sought to be

quashed, case under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of the

POCSO Act, stands registered against the respondent, Hon’ble

Apex Court in Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab

11/01/2019 23:08:18 :::HCHP
and another (2014)6 Supreme Court Cases 466, has held that

while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.PC, High Court


may not proceed to quash the offences of mental depravity or

offences like murder, rape, dacoity, but present is the case, where

in the peculiar facts and circumstances, this Court deems it fit

to consider the prayer made in the present petition for

quashing of FIR as well as consequent proceedings pending in

the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Chamba, H.P., but before

considering the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner in the

given facts and circumstances of the Case, this Court deems it

fit to adjourn the case for some time to enable the parties to

solemnize marriage as has been settled inter-se them.

5. Today, during the proceedings of the case,

prosecutrix-petitioner No.2 reiterated on oath that she of her

own volition has filed present petition for quashing of FIR and

has no objection in case, case registered against respondent

No.2-accused is ordered to be quashed and set-aside. She

further stated that she wants to marry respondent No.2. While

sticking to her statement given to the learned court below on

31.10.2018, she again reiterated that no wrong act was

committed by the accused with her on the alleged date of the

incident. Similarly, petitioner No.1, who happened to be the

complainant (mother of the victim-prosecutrix) in the instant

case, stated on oath that she of her own volition and without

there being any external pressure has entered into compromise

and has no objection in case FIR lodged at her behest is

11/01/2019 23:08:18 :::HCHP
ordered to be quashed. She further stated that in view of the

subsequent circumstances, she along with her family members


has decided to perform marriage of petitioner No.2 (victim-

prosecutrix) with the respondent-accused, whose parents are

readily agreed for the same. Petitioner No. 3 Smt. Kamlo Devi,

who happens to be mother of the respondent accused, also

stated on oath that she of her own volition has entered into

compromise and as per agreement inter-se parties, marriage of

victim-prosecutrix would be solemnized with respondent No. 2-

accused, who happened to be her son. She stated on oath

before this Court that petitioner No.2 is happily accepted in the

family and is residing with them alongwith her child and she

would not be harassed in any way and in the event of any

complaint of harassment or mental torture, if any, to the victim-

prosecutrix, she along with her son respondent No.2 would

render themselves liable for penal consequences as well as

contempt of Court. Statements having been made by

petitioners No. 1 to 3 have been taken on record.

6. Now let matter be listed for further orders on


10th January, 2019 (Sandeep Sharma),
manjit Judge

11/01/2019 23:08:18 :::HCHP

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation