High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/263/2022allowed

Vikrant v. State Of Haryana And Another

2022-09-29Mr. Justice Vivek Puri7 pages

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and In the High Court for the States of Punjab and In the High Court for the States of Punjab and In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Haryana at Chandigarh Haryana at Chandigarh Haryana at Chandigarh CRM CRM CRM CRM-M-263 263-20 Date of Decision:

Date of Decision:

Date of Decision: September September September September 29, 2022 , 2022 , 2022 , 2022 Vikrant ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK PURI VIVEK PURI VIVEK PURI VIVEK PURI Present: Mr. Aditya Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Karan Garg, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Shakti Singh, Advocate for Mr. Jitender Singh, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 and 3.

Vivek Puri, J.

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. 37, dated 12.02.2020, under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 of the Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC') and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Sadar Jhajjar and all the consequential

-2proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 23.08.2021.

Briefly, the FIR has been registered on the basis of the statement of the respondent no.2, father of the victim, alleging that the respondent no.3/victim, who is aged about 16 years, went missing from the house. It was suspected that the petitioner has kidnapped the victim.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for petitioner, as well as, respondents no.2 and 3 that the date of birth of victim/respondent no.3 is 07.11.2003.

Subsequent to the registration of the FIR and after attaining age majority, petitioner has solemnized marriage with victim/respondent no.3. Annexure P-2 is the copy of the wedding invitation card and Annexures P-4 to P-6 are the photographs depicting the marriage. The marriage has been solemnized with the consent and participation of the parents of respondent no.3. The respondent no.2 is the father of the victim. The respondents no.2 and 3 along with the mother of the victim have submitted affidavits (Annexures P-7 to P-9) indicating the fact of marriage. The respondent no.3 is stated to be

-3happily residing in the matrimonial home with the petitioner.

In terms of order dated 18.07.2022, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa 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.

In compliance order dated 18.07.2022, both the parties have appeared before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistratecum-Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jhajjar and got their statements recorded. It may be mentioned here that in report name complainant has been mentioned, but the same is not being reproduced in the judgment and is being referred to as `respondent no.3'. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate after recording the statements of the parties, has sent the report dated 31.08.2022, the relevant para whereof reads as under:- "On a perusal of the statements, it appears that the compromise between the parties is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue

-4influence. As per the report of the Investigating Officer there is only one person arrayed as an accused in this case. No other accused was proclaimed offender / person in this case. Further as per the report of the Investigating Officer, there is no other case wherein the present accused has been involved and in this case, there is one complainant namely Dharmender son of Ram Kumar and one victim, namely, respondent no.3 wife of Vikrant."

Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that as an amicable settlement has been effected between the private parties and have solemnized marriage, it shall be appropriate to meet ends justice, if FIR and subsequent proceedings are quashed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also sought to place reliance upon Criminal Appeal Criminal Appeal Criminal Appeal Criminal Appeal Nos. 394 Nos. 394 Nos. 394 Nos. 394-395 of 2021 395 of 2021 titled 'Anand D.V Versus 'Anand D.V Versus 'Anand D.V Versus 'Anand D.V Versus State and another'

State and another'

State and another' wherein the proceedings were quashed after the parties eventually got married subsequent to registration FIR.

Reliance has also been placed upon 2018(2) Crimes 2018(2) Crimes 2018(2) Crimes 2018(2) Crimes 438 titled 'Lovely Versus State of Punjab'

'Lovely Versus State of Punjab'

'Lovely Versus State of Punjab' wherein the proceedings were quashed after the parties had solemnized marriage and were happily residing as husband and wife.

-5The 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 Court is satisfied that in order to secure the ends of justice, it should interfere under its inherent powers, it ought to do so.

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, in the case in hand, respondent No.3 after having attained the age of majority has solemnized the marriage with the petitioner and are stated to be residing happily with each other.

In such circumstances, the possibility of conviction also become remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case will cause injustice

-6not only to the petitioner but also to respondent No.3, who is now legally wedded wife of the petitioner.

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 the first instance but it has materialized into marriage. The respondent No.3 has attained the requisite age for valid marriage. In such a situation, continuation 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 healthy matrimonial relationship between the petitioner and respondent No.3 as husband and wife.

For the aforesaid view, this Court finds support from Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Gian Singh Gian Singh Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and anothe and anothe and anothe and another 2014(6)SCC 466.

r 2014(6)SCC 466.

-7Considering peculiar facts and circumstances of the case noted above, coupled with the reasons aforementioned and to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 37, dated 12.02.2020, under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 IPC and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Sadar Jhajjar and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are ordered to be quashed, however, qua the petitioner only.

Resultantly, with above-said observations made, the instant petition stands allowed.

September 2 September 2 September 2 September 29, 2022 , 2022 , 2022 , 2022 [Vivek Puri] [Vivek Puri] [Vivek Puri] [Vivek Puri] vkd Judge Judge Judge Judge Whether reasonable / speaking :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No