In CRM-M-12854-2021-PUNJ HC- P&H HC quashes FIR pertaining to non-compoundable offences under sections 376(2)(n) & 506 of IPC, says in order to do complete justice and protect future of parties, compromise between them can’t be ignored
Justice Amarjot Singh Bhatti [13-04-2023]

Read Order: CHANDAN PASWAN VS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

Mansimran Kaur

Chandigarh, April 20, 2023: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has allowed a petition preferred by the petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of an FIR filed under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC, and all other subsequent proceedings on the basis of compromise between the parties.

A Single- Judge bench of Justice Amarjot Singh Bhatti allowed the present petition by observing that  in  the case in hand the petitioner and respondent were major and they  performed their  marriage, therefore their married life couldn’t be disturbed for the sake of trial in the aforesaid FIR.

Factual matrix of the case was such that the prosecutrix/ second respondent  lodged the FIR alleging that she was  about 20 years of age. She was residing in a rental house of Kuldeep Singh. Earlier she was married to Ranjit Chaudhary. She lived with him only for three days. He used to beat her after consuming liquor. She returned back to the house of her elder sister and took divorce from her first husband. She started residing with her parents at Ahmedgarh. During this period she came in contact with Chandan Paswan, who was residing in their mohalla. He was working at the shop of Vishal. 

He used to visit her house whenever she was alone and committed rape with her forcibly. She did not disclose about the conduct of Chandan Paswan to her parents. She has narrated various incidents when he came to the house and raped her without her consent. On one occasion the matter was compromised and their marriage was to be solemnized on February 27, 2020. Thereafter, Chandan Paswan ran away from his house after locking the house. She reported the matter to the police, on the basis of which, the present FIR was registered. 

The petitioner filed this petition for the quashing of aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise. The petitioner and the respondent were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements on the basis of compromise. 

After considering the submissions of the parties, the Court noted that from the report of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, it was vivid that the compromise was effected between the parties without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. 

In furtherance of the same, the Court noted that the offence under Section 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC is a serious offence and is non-compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. However, in order to do complete justice and to protect the future of the petitioner and  the second respondent the compromise arrived at between them cannot be ignored, the Court opined. 

Reference was made to the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr,  where it was explained that there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the court to exercise its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the section itself i.e. to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice.

 In the case in hand the petitioner and respondent were major and they performed marriage. Therefore their married life cannot be disturbed for the sake of trial in the aforesaid FIR, the Court remarked. 

Another reference was made to the judmgnet in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Anr.

Therefore by relying upon the ratio of the aforesaid judgments, the Bench opined that no purpose would be served with the continuation of criminal proceedings. Thus the FIR   registered under Sections 376(2) (n), 506 of IPC was quashed along with consequential proceedings. 

The present petition was accordingly allowed.