AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Pankaj Purohit, J
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has put to challenge the First Information Report No.0011 of 2025 dated 26.01.2025, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 64 & 74 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, registered with Police Station Kathgodam, District Nainital on the ground of settlement and compromise entered into between the parties.
Along with present criminal writ petition, a joint compounding application has also been filed by the parties, which is duly supported by separate affidavits of the parties.
In the compounding application, it has been stated that parties were in relationship and in that relationship, out of love and affection, they developed physical relations. Both the petitioner and respondent no.3 were major at the time of commission of the alleged offence.
Petitioner-Abhishek Arya @ Golu and respondent no.3-Bhawna Bisht are present in the Court duly identified by their respective counsel.
This Court interacted with the parties specifically respondent no.3-Bhawna Bisht in great deal. Respondent no.3-Bhawna Bisht stated before the Court that she does not want to pursue with the case and decided to live peacefully, amicably and live a happy married life as both the parties have entered into matrimonial alliance on 05.04.2025 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Haldwani. This fact has been brought by the petitioner through a supplementary affidavit annexing photographs of the marriage and the certificate to that effect is also annexed as annexure-SA1 to the supplementary affidavit.
From perusal of the record, it also transpires that marriage has now been registered with the Sub-Registrar, Registration of Marriage, Haldwani. This registration is also brought on record by the petitioner as annexure-SA2 to the supplementary affidavit.
Per contra, learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection on the ground that alleged offences are serious enough to compound and further the offence under Section 64 & 74 of BNS, 2023 are non-compoundable.
Having gone through the papers filed along with the writ petition as well as the facts and circumstances that the parties have entered into matrimonial alliance and they are living peacefully, this Court is of the opinion that it will be a futile exercise to ask the petitioner to face the criminal prosecution which would ultimately result into the acquittal.
So far as compounding of non-compoundable offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of a compromise in this regard in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and has held as below: -
“If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is, however, a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether to exercise or not such a power.”
Thus, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint, and Section 320 of Cr.P.C. does not limit or affect the powers of the Court. But here the Court is invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which is far wider than 528 BNSS, 2023.
In this view of the matter, compounding application (IA/1/2024) is hereby allowed. The compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. The First Information Report No.0011 of 2025 dated 26.01.2025, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 64 & 74 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, registered with Police Station Kathgodam, District Nainital is hereby quashed. Consequently, all the subsequent proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR automatically shall come to an end.
Present criminal writ petition stands allowed accordingly.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed off accordingly.