AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner herein seeks quashing of FIR No. 0325/2021 dated 14.07.2021, registered at Police Station Sagar Pur, for commission of offence under Section 363 IPC, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
As per the case of prosecution, the abovesaid FIR was registered on the basis of report lodged by mother of the minor girl. She claimed that her daughter, who was aged 14 ½ years, had left the house on 14.07.2021, without informing anyone.
Further investigation revealed that the minor-victim was in love with Krishan Avtar (petitioner herein). The petitioner was earlier her neighbour but even after he had vacated his house in the neighbourhood and shifted somewhere else, the petitioner and minor girl remained in touch for another 2-3 years and, eventually, the minor girl left home and started residing with him. She also revealed that she had entered into physical relation with him voluntarily, and that she got married to him in July, 2021.
Both the parties are already having two children and quashing is being sought as respondent No.2 is no longer interested in pursuing with the abovesaid FIR.
Charge-sheet has already been filed which is for commission of offences under Sections 363/366/376 IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
Petitioner has no prior antecedents of any nature whatsoever.
Petitioner is present in-person.
Respondent no. 2 is also present in-person along with her mother and she has been duly identified by Investigating Officer.
Learned APP for the State submits that at the relevant time, the victim was minor and, therefore, her consent has no legal sanctity.
Undoubtedly, the victim was minor at the time of alleged elopement but as on date, she has already attained the age of discretion and does not want to pursue with the FIR in question.
When asked, both respondent No.2 and her mother submitted that the matter has been amicably settled and that respondent No.2 is residing with her husband in complete peace and harmony for last 5 years. She submits that since she has, voluntarily, entered into settlement and is happy at her matrimonial home, she would have „no objection‟ if FIR in question is quashed. Her affidavit to abovesaid effect is also on record.
Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case and the fact that respondent No.2 is residing happily at her matrimonial home and does not want any further action against any of the petitioners, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would, rather, cast a needless shadow over peace and tranquillity between the couple, especially when they are now enjoying matrimonial bliss with their children.
In Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2014) 6 SCC 466, Hon‟ble Apex Court observed that proceedings, even in non-compoundable cases, can be quashed on the basis of settlement provided that the Court is satisfied that there was no meaningful purpose in continuing with the proceedings, and that the scope of conviction was remote and bleak. Reference be also made to Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.: (2012) 10 SCC 303.
Reference be also made Ayyub Malik v. State of Uttarakhand 2026 SCC OnLine SC 637, wherein the Hon‟ble Supreme Court while quashing proceedings related to offences under Sections 363/376(2)(d) IPC and Sections 5(8) and 6 of POCSO Act observed that continuing with further criminal proceedings would operate as a painful interference in the lives of those parties, who are staying together happily and peacefully and, therefore, it will be in the interest of rendering complete justice that proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed. Relevant para of the abovesaid judgment reads as under:-
“6.1Any litigation brings a kind of botheration for the parties. The uncertainty of the outcome of the litigation always looms large. When it is a criminal case, its pendency becomes burdensome and worrisome. For appellant No. 1 as well as appellant No. 2, negotiating the criminal proceedings in a court of law, notwithstanding that both are now husband and wife living together, would operate as painful interference in their happy life. The High Court would have done justice to the parties only by quashing the criminal proceedings against appellant No. 1 initiated by the complainant-father of appellant No. 2.”
Since respondent No.2 and petitioner are living a blissful matrimonial life, continuing with further proceedings would serve no real or meaningful purpose and would be akin to reopening a chapter in their lives which they have themselves chosen to close, thereby disrupting their stable family-life. Reference be made to Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008) 4 SCC 582, Mohd. Parwej v. State: 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1030, Harmeet Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi): 2026 SCC OnLine Del 1707 and Prem Kumar v. State and Others 2024 SCC OnLine Del 628, wherein also in such fact-situation, the proceedings were quashed.
Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.
Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No. 0325/2021 dated 14.07.2021, registered at Police Station Sagar Pur, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed.
The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
Pending application also stands disposed of.