IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 24.01.2025 Dheeraj ..... Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Mr. D.S. Matya, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Brijesh Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Navneet Kumar, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

*****

KIRTI SINGH, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.338 dated 18.10.2023, under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC registered at Police Station DLF PH-III Gurugram, District Gurugram and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise/affidavit dated 06.11.2023 (Annexure P3).

2. Order dated 12.03.2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench, wherein, the parties were directed to record their statements before the trial Court concerned, is reproduced below:-

Prayer in the instant petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

is for quashing of FIR No. 338 dated 18.10.2023 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC at Police Station DLF-III Gurugram, District Gurugram and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of affidavit dated 06.11.2023 (Annexure P-3) furnished by respondent No. 2 in favour of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that the petitioner and complainant/victim/respondent No. 2 herein, were in consensual relationship. At the time of alleged occurrence, the victim was 21 years of age. It is submitted that when the parents of the victim discovered about the relationship between the petitioner and the victim, they have objected to the same and compelled respondent No. 2 to lodge FIR against the petitioner. However, thereafter, respondent No. 2 furnished an affidavit dated 06.11.2023 (Annexure P-3) in favour of the petitioner, wherein she had categorically stated that she do not want to proceed against the petitioner in the present FIR and will co-operate with him in quashing/cancellation of FIR in all manners.

Notice of motion.

On the asking of Court, Mr. Surinder Kumar Dagar, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1-State; whereas Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Navneet Kumar, Advocate who is present in Court accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 2 and submits Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

Learned counsel for the State objects to the prayer for quashing of FIR (Annexure P-1) and submits that the alleged offence in the present case is under Section 376(2)(n), therefore, the FIR cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise/affidavit (Annexure P-3).

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgments of Hon’ble the Apex Court in Haji Iqbal @ Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of U.P. and others, Law Finder Doc ID # 2283535 and in Criminal Appeal No. 1217 of 2022, Kapil Gupta vs. State of NCT of Delhi and another, decided on 10.08.2022, to submit that in the aforesaid cases in similar circumstances, the FIR stands quashed on the basis of compromise.

In view of the above, the parties are directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the affidavit/compromise dated 06.11.2023 (Annexure P-3) on 30.03.2024 by moving an appropriate application or by presenting this order.

The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate is directed to submit the report on or before the next date of hearing i.e. 10.07.2024 containing the following information:-

1. Number of persons arrayed as accused in the FIR;

2. Whether any accused is a proclaimed offender;

3. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence;

4. Whether the accused persons are involved in any other FIR or not; and

5. The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the Investigating Officer so as to know how many victims/complainants are there in the FIR and all the victims/complainant as well as accused are party to the compromise in question.

A copy of the report be