Amandeep Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CRM-M-25667-2022 Date of Decision: August 17, 2023 Amandeep Singh ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ... Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK PURI Present: Mr. Nitish Garg, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Hittan Nehra, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
Mr. Rahul Arora, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
Vivek Puri, J.
1.
The petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure invoking its inherent jurisdiction for quashing of FIR No. 407, dated 28.12.2021, under Sections 313, 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC'), registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on basis affidavit dated 19.01.2022 (Annexure P-2).
CRM-M-25667-2022 -22. Status report by way of affidavit of Sanjeev Singla, P.P.S., Deputy Superintendent of Police, City-1, District Patiala on behalf of respondent no.1, is taken on record.
3.
Learned counsel for petitioner contends that FIR has been registered on the allegations that petitioner had been committing sexual intercourse with the respondent no.2 on the false pretext of marriage. The petitioner became pregnant on two occasions and abortion was conducted by administration of some tablets. The petitioner is serving as Major in Indian Army. His age is about 30 years and his date of birth is recorded as 11.01.1993 in the Aadhaar Card, copy whereof is Annexure P-4. The prosecutrix is aged about 26 years and her date of birth has been recorded as 25.08.1997 in the Aadhaar Card, copy whereof is Annexure P-5. The petitioner and the respondent no.2 have attained the age for valid marriage and have solemnized marriage on 13.11.2022. Annexure P-7 is the copy of marriage certificate issued by the Gurudwara Sri Guru Harkrishan Sahib, Urban Estate, Ambala City. The photographs depicting the ceremonies of marriage have also been annexed with the petition as Annexure P-6. Moreover, in the status report
CRM-M-25667-2022 -3furnished on behalf of respondent no.1, it has also been submitted that on 16.01.2023, the respondent no.2 had appeared before the police authorities and revealed that her marriage has been solemnized with the petitioner on 13.11.2022. 4.
In terms of order dated 10.05.2023, the parties were directed to appear before the learned Illaqa/Duty Magistrate for recording their statements and the concerned Court was directed to send the report with regard to genuineness of compromise and also to intimate whether any of the accused has been declared proclaimed offender in the case.
5.
In compliance order dated 10.05.2023, both the private parties have appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patiala, and got their statements recorded. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class after recording the statements of the parties, has sent the report dated 03.07.2023, the relevant para whereof reads as under:- 1.
The number As per the statement of accused in Investigating officer, aforesaid FIR and to ASI Randhir Singh, only report whether any of accused Amandeep Singh is the accused has been arrayed as accused in FIR declared proclaimed No. 407 dated 28.12.2021 offender or any such under Sections 313,
CRM-M-25667-2022 -4proceedings have been 376(2)(n) IPC, P.S. Civil initiated or pending Lines, Patiala and he against him?
want not declared as proclaimed offender in this case nor any proceedings have been initiated for pending against him for declaring him proclaimed offender.
2.
Whether As per the statements of compromise entered both the complainant and between the parties is accused, the compromise genuine, voluntarily effected between them is without any coercion genuine, voluntarily and or undue influence?
same is without any coercion or undue influence.
3.
Statement IO In view statement regarding suffered by Investigating involvement Officer Inspector Randhir petitioner in any Singh, accused Amandeep other FIR?
Singh son of Bikkar Singh is not involved in any other FIR.
4. Status of the trial As per the statements of pending before Investigating Officer and Court?
Ahlmad this Court, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. has not been filed by the concerned police authorities in this case against accused before the Court."
6.
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that as an amicable settlement has been effected between private parties and petitioner and respondent no.2 have solemnized
CRM-M-25667-2022 -5marriage, it shall be appropriate to meet the ends of justice, if the FIR and subsequent proceedings are quashed.
7.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also sought to place reliance on the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Ananda D.V Versus State and another', 2021 All SCR (Crl.) 1175, wherein the proceedings were quashed after the parties eventually got married subsequent to the registration of the FIR. Reliance has also been placed upon 2018(2) Crimes 438 (Punjab & Haryana) titled 'Lovely Versus State of Punjab' wherein the proceedings were quashed after the parties had solemnized marriage and were happily residing as husband and wife.
8.
The inherent power vested in this Court under Section Code Criminal Procedure is not to be invoked as a matter of routine but to prevent the abuse of power of Court and to secure ends of justice. This section gives the power to this Court to entertain applications which are not contemplated in the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the event, it is felt that the ends of justice will require that the Court can invoke the extraordinary powers which are to be exercised with restraint and not lightly. In the event, the
CRM-M-25667-2022 -6Court is satisfied that in order to secure the ends of justice, it should interfere under its inherent powers, it ought to do so.
9.
It may be mentioned here that in the normal course of events, this Court may not have been inclined to quash the FIR in case of a noncompoundable offence involving the crime which is heinous and serious in nature. However, petitioner and respondent no.2 are stated to be aged about 30 and 26 years, respectively and are stated to be residing happily with each other after solemnization of marriage.
10.
In such circumstances, the possibility of conviction also becomes remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case will cause injustice not only to the petitioner but also to respondent No.2, who is now legally wedded wife of the petitioner.
11.
As such, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for exercising the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., so as to secure the ends of justice in the light of amicable settlement having been effected between the parties. Although the FIR was registered at first instance but petitioner and respondent No.2 were in
CRM-M-25667-2022 -7relationship and it has materialized into marriage. The respondent No.2 has attained the requisite age for valid marriage. In such a situation, continuation of the prosecution would result in sheer abuse of process of law. In the event, the FIR is quashed, it will be for the welfare of the parties and would also tend to strengthen the healthy matrimonial relationship between the petitioner and respondent No.2 as husband and wife.
12.
For the aforesaid view, this Court finds support from Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, approved by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another 2014(6)SCC 466.
13.
Considering peculiar facts and circumstances of the case noted above, coupled with the reasons aforementioned and to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 407, dated 28.12.2021, under Sections 313, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC'), registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Patiala, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are
CRM-M-25667-2022 -8ordered to be quashed, however, qua the petitioner only.
14.
Resultantly, with above-said observations made, the instant petition stands allowed.
August 17, 2023 [Vivek Puri] vkd Judge Whether reasonable / speaking :
Yes Whether reportable :
Yes