The main legal principle established in the judgment is the court's inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings in appropriate cases, taking into account the settlement between the parties, the welfare of the victim, and the interest of society in saving the family unit.

JUDGMENT :

Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

The instant petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after referred to as 'Cr.PC') has been filed by petitioners, for quashing FIR No. 102, dated 29.04.2018 registered at P.S. Sadar Chamba, District Chamba, under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (herein after referred to as 'IPC') and criminal proceedings initiated in pursuance thereto.

2. Today petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh and petitioner No.2 Smt. Poonam Kumari, present in person, have been identified by Mr. Nimish Gupta, Advocate and their statements have been recorded on oath.

3. Petitioner No.2 Smt.Poonam Kumari, in her statement, has deposed that she is complainant in present case and petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh is her husband. She has stated that on 29.4.2019 she had lodged FIR against Arvind Singh in P.S.Sadar Chamba after delivery of male child. She has also deposed that at that time, she was pursuing her course of Draftsman in Jeevan Lakshay ITI, Chamba and during that period, she had come in contact of petitioner No.1 Arvind during Minjar fair and thereafter, they had developed intimacy. She has further stated that he had assured her to marry and had developed physical relations with her, whereupon she conceived a child and when she contacted Arvind Singh and disclosed about this, he advised her to abort the child and not to contact him on telephone and on 29th April, 2018 she had delivered a male child in Government Hospital, Chamba and thereafter she lodged FIR against petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh.

4. It is also stated by Smt. Poonam Kumari that later on, on 11th May, 2018, petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh came to hospital and took her and their child to his parental house in village Vadei and explained that earlier his parents were not agreeing to marry him with her, however later on, he had succeeded to persuade them to accept their relations and to accept her as their daughter-in-law and thereafter petitioner No.1 had come to Chamba to take her to home. She has also stated that the FIR is a result of misunderstanding caused on account of disagreement of parents of petitioner No.1 to accept their relations.

5. Petitioner No.2/complainant has further stated that parents of petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh had contacted her parents and their parents have agreed to marry them with each other and ultimately, on 14th October, 2018 her marriage was solemnized with petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh in his village Vadei and she has also been recorded in the Parivar Register of concerned Panchayat as wife of petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh and their son Shivansh has also been recorded in Parivar Register of Panchyat as their son. It is also stated by her that she stayed in the house of petitioner No.1 since May, 2018 till solemnization of their marriage in October, 2018 along with their child and after solemnization also, she is residing in her matrimonial home happily and satisfactorily and petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh as well as his parents are behaving with her properly and they are living jointly under one roof along with their son and parents of petitioner No.1 Arvind Singh and family of petitioner No.1 is maintaining her and their child properly as per their resources and further stated that now in case, the proceedings are continued against petitioner No.1, it will cause harm not only to her but also to future of their son Shivan Dharmani as she would be constrained to lead evidence against her own husband in a case which is a result of misunderstanding and now stands resolved. It is also stated by her that continuation of the said case would result into breaking of their family, therefore, she does not intend to pursue the case against petitioner No.1 and thus have agreed to file present petition for quashing of FIR and criminal proceeding initiated in pursuance thereto. She has also stated that she has deposed in Court out of her free will, consent and also without any fear, threat, pressure or coercion.

6. Pe