The main legal point established in the judgment is the wide plenitude of the inherent power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings, especially when the parties have settled their dispute, as guided by various judicial precedents.

JUDGMENT

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. - Matter has been taken up through video conferencing via Webex facility in the light of the Pandemic Covid-19 situation and as per instructions.

CRM-17368-2021

2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and CRM-M-11148-2021 is taken on board today itself.

CRM-M-11148-2021

3. Instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.110, dated 8.6.2020, under Section 346 IPC and later on added Sections 9 and 10 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, registered at Police Station Chhapar, District Yamunanagar and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of Compromise, FIR in question was got registered by complainant-respondent No.2 and the investigation commenced thereon. However, with the intervention of respectables, finally the parties arrived at settlement and they resolved their inter se dispute, which is apparent from Compromise Deed, annexed as Annexure P-4. On the basis of the compromise, the petitioner is praying that continuation of these proceedings would be a futile exercise and an abuse of process of the Court and thus, the FIR in question and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom may be quashed in the interest of justice.

4. This Court vide order dated 1.4.2021 directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements, as contended before the Court, and the Magistrate/trial Court was also directed to send its report.

5. In pursuance of the same, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar, sent its report dated 27.4.2021 to this Court. With the report she has also annexed the original statements of complainant Sukhdev Singh, vicitm Kamlesh and joint statement of accused Vicky and Gian Chand, recorded on 27.4.2021. On the basis of the statements, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge has concluded in its report that it appears that the parties have entered into a compromise and accused Vicky and Gian Chand have been named in the FIR and that there is no other accused except them and none of the accused persons was declared proclaimed offender in the case.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and the report sent by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge.

7. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for exercising the inherent powers of this Court in favour of the prayer made by the accused.

8. A bare perusal of statutory provision of the 482 Cr.P.C. would show that the High Court may make such orders, as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Section 320 Cr.P.C. is equally relevant for consideration, which prescribes the procedure for compounding of the offences under the Indian Penal Code.

9. Admittedly, as per statutory provisions, the offences in the FIR are non-compoundable offence and thus, Section 482 Cr.P.C. and Section 320 Cr.P.C. are of utmost importance for decision of the case. Such an issue was appreciated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and others vs State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675. Their Lordships appreciated the issue involved in a very exhaustive manner and laid down as under:-

"8. It is, thus, clear that Madhu Limaye s, (1977) 4 SCC 551 case does not lay down any general proposition limiting power of quashing the criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint as vested in Section 482 of the Code or extra ordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We are, therefore, of the view that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is, however, a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each ca