IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 06.02.2025 DINESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ..... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Mr. Arjun Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Brijesh Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Harjit Yadav, Advocate for Mr. Shashi Kumar Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.2.

*****

KIRTI SINGH, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for quashing of FIR No.302 dated 27.06.2024, under Sections 376(2) (n) and 506 IPC registered at Police Station Model Town, Rewari and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kapil Gupta Vs. State of N.C.T. of Delhi and another, 2022 (4) RCR (Crl.) 497, to contend that FIR under Section 376 of IPC (now Section 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) can be quashed on the basis of compromise. Learned counsel has further relied upon a judgment of this Court in Karan Sharma Vs. State of Haryana and another, 2021(1) Law Herald 149 and contends that once the parties have compromised the matter and decided to live in peace, no useful purpose will be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

3. Reply dated 04.02.2025 has been filed by learned State counsel, in Court today, which is taken on record.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the case file.

5. This Court while directing the parties to appear before the Area Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements with regard to the compromise, passed the following order on 11.09.2024:- “Prayer in the instant 1st petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is for quashing of FIR No. 302 dated 27.06.2024 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 376(2)(n)and 506 IPC at Police Station Model Town, Rewari and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom in view of the statement dated 08.07.2024 and affidavits dated 02.07.2024 and 13.08.2024 (Annexures P-2 to P-4, respectively) of respondent No. 2-complainant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that the petitioner is running a transport business and respondent No. 2- complainant was employed as his Clerk. Both the petitioner and respondent No. 2-complainant are married to their respective spouses, however, a consensual relationship has been developed between them.When the wife of the petitioner discovered about their alliance, she asked the petitioner to remove respondent No. 2 from job. Thereafter, the present FIR came to be registered against the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the allegations made in the FIR are false and fabricated as admittedly, the petitioner and the complainant were in a consensual relationship. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to affidavit dated 02.07.2024 (Annexure P-3) duly sworn-in by respondent No. 2-complainant, wherein in para No. 4 thereof, she has stated that ‘she came under someone’s pressure and lodged a complaint against Dinesh in Model Town Police Station Rewari’. Reference has also been made to statement of the complainant dated 08.07.2024 (Annexure P-2) (at page 15 of the paper-book), wherein she has stated that ‘the petitioner helped her by giving a job in bad times, but not he has stopped talking to her, so she had filed the present complaint to put pressure on him. Learned counsel for the petitioner also refers to the another affidavit of the complainant dated 13.08.2024 (Annexure P-4), wherein in para No. 3 thereof, she has stated that ‘we both developed emotional and physical relationship without any pressure and with consent. Thereafter, on 22.10.2023 Dinesh in the influence and coercion of wife removed me from the job’. Further, it is submitted that the present petitioner is the only accused in the present case and he has never been declared as proclaimed offen