IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Robin Phukan, J.
Apriya Chikro and Another - Petitioners
Versus
State of Arunachal Pradesh - Respondent
Crl. Petn. No. 30 of 2021
Decided On : 02-09-2021
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 366-A, 498-A, 506, 376, – Criminal procedure Code, 1973, Section 482, 320, 173 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012 –Section 4/6 – Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty – Punishment for criminal intimidation – Offence of rape – Quashing for First Information Report – Procuration of minor girl – Application, under section 482 of the CrPC, is preferred (informant, w, PO/PS-, District-, Arunachal Pradesh, petitioner No. 1 and by petitioner, Arunachal Pradesh, jointly, for setting aside and quashing the FIR of Tezu Women P.S. Case, registered under sections 498-A/506 of the Penal Code, 1860, on the basis of a Deed of Settlement, executed by both the parties, before Executive Magistrate at Tezu – Held, Court have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as of the learned Addl. P.P., in the light of facts and circumstances on the record and case diary, and we left unimpressed by the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, we find that there is substance in the submission of the learned Addl. P.P., and we record our concurrence to the same – Case in hand also does not fall in any of the categories of cases, given by way of illustration, in the case, by the hon'ble Supreme Court, where the inherent power, under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice – Categories of cases illustrated therein are applying the ratio, laid down by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra) and (supra) and (supra) to factual matrix of the case in hand, we are constrained to hold that this is not a fit case where the inherent power under section 482, CrPC can be invoked to quash the FIR of Tezu P.S. Case – Petition rejected.
ORDER :
1. This application, under section 482 of the CrPC, is preferred by Mrs. Apriya Chikro (informant, w/o Shri Anemso Pul, Village-Chereng, PO/PS-Wakro, District-Lohit, Arunachal Pradesh, petitioner No. 1 and by petitioner No. 2-Shri Anemso Pul, s/o late Sigu Pul, Village-Chereng, District-Lohit, Arunachal Pradesh, jointly, for setting aside and quashing the FIR of Tezu Women P.S. Case No. 06/2021, registered under sections 498-A/506 of the Penal Code, 1860 dated 2.6.2021, on the basis of a Deed of Settlement, dated 8.9.2021, executed by both the parties, before the Executive Magistrate at Tezu on 9.7.2021.
2. Heard Mr. C.W. Mantaw, learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Addl. P.P. for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.
3. The factual background, under which Tezu Women P.S. Case No. 06/2021, under section 498-A/506 of the Indina Penal Code, came to be registered, is adumbrated hereinbelow
The petitioner No. 1, then lodged one FIR (Annexure-I) with the Officer in-Charge of Women Police Station, Tezu on 2.6.2021. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer in-Charge of Women Police Station, Tezu registered the case, being Tezu Women P.S. Case No. 06/2021, under section 498-A/506 of the Penal Code, 1860 and endorsed Inspector, Smti. Bharati Mingki, to investigate the same.
Pending completion of investigation, the petitioner-No. 1 entered into a settlement deed (Annexure-II) with the petitioner No. 2. And thereafter, she approach the Officer in-Charge Women. Police Station, Tezu with one petition (Annexure-III) for withdrawal of Tezu Women P.S. Case No. 06/2021, registered under section 498-A/506 of the Penal Code, 1860. She has also filed another petition (Annexure-III colley) before the learned JMFC, Tezu informing him about the settlement of the case between her and her husband. Thereafter, the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 approached this court for quashing the FIR (Annexure-I), by filing the present petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”
4. Mr. C.W. Mantaw, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the law relating to quashing of FIR, exercising the inherent power under section 482 of the CrPC is settled by Kon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of decisions. It is submitted that the petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 are husband and wife and they have settled the disputes between themselves and they are no longer interested to pursue with the case and they have also entered into a settlement deed dated 9.7.2021, and on the basis
Powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should be exercised in rarest of rare cases and not, on basis of alleged compromise in heinous offences.
Point of Law : No doubt, while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C, for quashing of FIR, Court is also required to take into consideration interest of society at large, but in the present case,....
Point of Law : POCSO Act – Compromise – Quash of criminal proceedings.
Serious offences like section 376 IPC cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between the parties.
The High Court can quash FIRs for non-compoundable offences if parties amicably settle disputes, balancing justice with public interest.
The court may quash FIRs in cases involving serious offences if the parties have resolved their dispute amicably and the likelihood of conviction is minimal.
Offence of Rape – Compounding of offence - Interest of justice will be met, in case, the proceedings are quashed, as the parties have already compromised the matter.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of quashing an FIR should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, especially at the nascent stage of investigation, and that....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.