Back
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Bhupender Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. compromise between parties after fir (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments against quashing fir due to serious nature of allegations (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. legal principles related to quashing fir based on compromise (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. judicial considerations for exercising quashing powers (Para 13 , 15) |
| 5. petition for quashing fr rejected (Para 16 , 17) |
Judgment
Mr. Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.
The matter comes up on the joint prayer of both the counsels appearing for the accused-petitioner and the complainant stating that a compromise has taken place amongst them and therefore the FIR and further proceedings be quashed as against the petitioner.
2. It is stated that the complainant and this petitioner wanted to marry but as the marriage could not take place, the complainant in fit of anger and rage lodged an FIR for offence under Section 376 (2)(n) of IPC at Police station Bhondsi, District Gurugram on 08.04.2023. She also got her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C wherein she made allegations of having been raped by the petitioner.
3. Soon thereafter within 15 days or so i.e on 24.04.2023, a compromise was arrived at between the parties after the elders inter
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
