Kuldeep Kaur v. State Of Punjab And Others

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:28.02.2020 Kuldeep Kaur

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR Present:- Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Davinder Bir Singh, DAG, Punjab.

None for respondents No.2 and 3.

-.- JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.133 dated 01.08.2018 registered under Sections 354-C IPC, Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 3 and 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 at Police Station City Batala, District Batala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.

2.

The FIR has been registered against the petitioner on the statement of complainant-Anjali levelling allegations of making nude video of the complainant and viral the same. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences. 3.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a

-2compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Batala stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

4.

Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab on instructions from the Investigating Officer admits the factum of compromise and submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

6.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

7.

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed and FIR No.133 dated 01.08.2018 registered under Sections 354-C IPC, Section 67 of Information

-3Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 3 and 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 at Police Station City Batala, District Batala (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioner. (JAISHREE THAKUR) JUDGE February 28, 2020 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No