Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Jaishree Thakur, J.
Kuljot Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab And Another - Respondent
CRM-M No. 36076 of 2019
Decided On : 05-02-2020
Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - 376 IPC - 29.2, 29.5, 5, 2012(10) SCC 303 - The court considered the compromise entered into by the parties and the nature of the offence under Section 376 IPC. It relied on principles from previous judgments to accept the compromise and quash the FIR, emphasizing the private nature of the dispute and the absence of public policy concerns.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of an FIR registered under Section 376 IPC, stating that he had made physical relations with the complainant without her consent, but later solemnized marriage with her. The complainant later entered into a compromise and did not want to pursue the FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the compromise, the nature of the offence, and previous judgments to allow the petition and quash the FIR, as the complainant had solemnized marriage with the petitioner and did not want to proceed with the case.
Issues: Quashing of FIR under Section 376 IPC, consideration of compromise, and applicability of previous judgments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the nature of the offence, the compromise entered into by the parties, and previous judgments to accept the compromise and quash the FIR.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the FIR registered under Section 376 IPC was quashed based on the compromise entered into by the parties.
JUDGMENT
Jaishree Thakur, J. (Oral). - This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.266 dated 01.08.2018 registered under Section 376 Indian Penal Code at Police Station Division No.5, Ludhiana (Annexure P-l) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 29.07.2019 (Annexure P-4 ).
2. In brief, the facts of the case are that an FIR came to be registered on 01.08.2018 under Sections 376 IPC at Police Station Division No.5, Ludhiana in which it was stated that the petitioner-Kuljot Singh @ Sonu pressurized the complainant to marry him but when she refused to do so, one day finding her alone in house, he made physical relation with her without her consent. Kuljot Singh on the pretext of marriage made physical relations with her many times but later on, he refused to marry her. On 28.07.2018, the complainant disclosed everything to her parents and brothers. On the intervention of panchayat, Kuljot Singh @ Sonu and his family members agreed to solemnize marriage of Kuljot Singh with complainant on 01.08.2018 in Gurdwara Sahib. On the day of marriage, family of the complainant made all arrangements of marriage but they came to know from family members of Kuljot Singh that he had gone somewhere last night without telling anything. Kuljot Singh on the pretext of marrying her made physical relations with her but later on refused to do so and therefore, had committed fraud with her.
3. However, after lodging of the FIR, petitioner has solemnized marriage with the complainant on 31.10.2018 at Gurdwara Singh Sabha, Ludhiana and a compromise dated 29.07.2019 (Annexure P-4) has also been entered into whereby the complainant herein made a statement by way of affidavit that since the petitioner has solemnized marriage with her and they are living as husband and wife, she has no objection if the FIR lodged by her against the petitioner is quashed. Based on the said compromise, the instant quashing petition was filed.
4. By an order dated 30.08.2019, parties were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate on 05.11.2019 so that their statement could be recorded regarding the genuineness of the compromise. The parties appeared before the Illaqa Magistrate wherein a statement of the complainant was recorded that she did not want to pursue the FIR.
5. In normal circumstances, the Court would not entertain a matter when the non compoundable offences are heinous in nature and against the public. In the instant case, the offence, complained of, is under Section 376 IPC, which is an offence of grave nature. In the eyes of law, the offence of rape is serious and non-compoundable and the Courts should not in the ordinary circumstances interfere and quash the FIR that has been registered. However, there are always exceptions to the normal rules and certain categories of cases, which deserve consideration specially when it is case of love affair between teenagers and on fear of the society and pressure from the community one party alleges rape, cases where the accused and the victim are well known to each other and allegation of rape is levelled only because the accused refused to marry, as well as the age, educational maturity and the mental capacity, sequences of the same ought to be kept in mind when inclined to interfere.
6. In the instant case, a complaint came to be made in which it was stated that accused had on the pretext of marrying the complainant had committed rape and later on refused to marry her. However, later on, the accused, who is petitioner herein, has solemnized marriage with the respondent No.2-complainant and they are living now as husband and wife. Moreover, with the intervention of respectables, a compromise has also been entered into between them whereby it is decided by the complainant that the FIR would not be pursued.
7. In a judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and ano
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
