ORDER :

Heard.

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking quashment of FIR registered against him in Police Station- Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh under Crime No.595 of 2022 and all connected criminal proceedings pursuant to FIR.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent No.2 has lodged report in concerned police station making allegation that on 02.06.2021 at about 11:00 AM when prosecutrix went to office of the petitioner, he caught hold of her hands and has touched her body with ill intention. The incident was reported to concerned police station, based upon which, offence under Section 354 of IPC was registered. Except this, there is no other dispute between the parties and during pendency of the investigation, a settlement has been arrived at between the petitioner and complainant/respondent No.2. He also contended that respondent No.2 has executed an affidavit before the Notary in this regard specifying that she does not want any further proceedings on her complaint filed in the police station- Kotwali, Raigarh. After filing of this petition, based on ground raised, this Court directed the petitioner and respondent No.2 to appear before the Additional Registrar (Judicial) for recording their statement, pursuant to which statement of parties were recorded, wherein the prosecutrix stated that she has entered into settlement without any pressure and she does not want any further proceedings or action on the FIR registered under Crime No.595 of 2022 for offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC on her complaint.

3. Learned counsel for the State as also counsel for respondent No.2 do not dispute the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to execution of affidavit and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded before the Additional Registrar (Judicial) stating that she does not want further action or proceedings on her complaint registered by Police Station -Kotwali, Raigarh.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed align with the petition.

5. Statement of complainant/respondent No.2 recorded by the Additional Registrar (Judicial) on 28.02.2023 is perused. In her statement, complainant/prosecutrix has very clearly stated that there is settlement between them and she does not want to continue with her report for the offence alleged under Section 354 of IPC registered by Police Station- Kotwali, District- Raigarh.

6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303 held as under:-

“61. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot