The High Court can quash FIRs in non-compoundable offences if continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process and serve no useful purpose.

JUDGMENT

Mrs. Manisha Batra, J. (Oral)

The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No. 88 dated 15.10.2023, registered under Sections 452, 354, 354A, 354A, 376, 511 and 423 of the IPC at Police Station Qila Lal Singh, District Batala along with the all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of the statement recorded on 15.10.2023 by complainant 'P' (name withheld), aged about 25 years, alleging therein that on she was two month pregnant. At 06:00 PM, when she was doing the household work, her neighbour Manjinder Singh (petitioner herein) entered into her house through stairs and choked her mouth and twisted her hands. He dragged her to the bathroom and tried to commit rape upon her but at the same time, her husband knocked at the door and the petitioner by kicking in her stomach and hitting her with a bathroom faucet, ran away towards his house through the stairs. She prayed for taking action against the culprit. During investigation, the petitioner was arrested and subsequently, he was released on bail. The trial is going on.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that both the parties are major. They have settled their dispute amicably with the intervention of the respectables of the society. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner as chances of his conviction are remote and bleak as the complainant herself has turned hostile during trial. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2/complainant has admitted to the factum of compromise entered into between the parties and has submitted that respondent No.2/complainant has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

5. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer of the petitioner by arguing that the petitioner is accused of committing offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section511 of the IPC, which is quite serious in nature and falls within the category of heinous crime. The compromise between the parties is not permissible in law. While stressing that the petition is misconceived, he has urged that the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the material placed on record.

7. It will be relevant to mention here that vide order dated 20.11.2023 passed by this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 20.12.2023 for recording their statements with regard to the compromise/settlement. The trial Court was directed to submit its report. A report has been submitted by the trial Court as per which the statements of the respondent No.2/complainant, the present petitioner and the Investigating Officer had been recorded on 20.12.2023. It is also reported that the trial Court was satisfied that the compromise between the parties was genuine and without any undue influence.

8. There are catena of judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court whereby, parameters governing the exercise of jurisdiction of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are well settled. In a celebrated judgment cited as State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SUPP (1) SCC 335, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed different categories of cases wherein, the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. could be exercised either to prevent abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, while observing that it might not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined, sufficiently channelized, inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list or myriad kind of cases where such powers should be exercised. The following principles have been culled out:-

"102 (1) Where t