IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-65399-2023 Date of Decision:07.04.2026 Aashish …Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana and Others …Respondents Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present: Mr. Lalit Kumar Narang, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, Sr.DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Akshay Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

***

N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C with a prayer to quash the FIR No.160 dated 19.05.2023, under Section 346 of IPC, (Section 342,365,376(2)(n), 506 of IPC added later on, registered at Police Station Badli, District Jhajjar (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the FIR (Annexure P-1) was initially registered under Section 346 of IPC on the basis of the statement made by Sumit, husband of the prosecutrix and the same has been reproduced below:-

“To The SHO, Badli, Sir, It is humbly requested that I, Sumit son of Motilal, permanent resident of village Dulhera Jhajjar. On the night of 18/19.05.2023, I slept with my wife (Jyoti) and children. When I woke up in the morning today, I did not find my wife Jyoti at home, then I find for her everywhere, but she did not find anywhere. I suspect that my wife has been kept or hidden by some unknown person at an unknown place. Kindly search for my wife Jyoti and legal action should be taken against the unknown person. Jyoti's appearance is as follows: fair complexion, round face, height 5 feet 2 inch, wearing cream coloured suit, salwar and black sandals. Sd/- Sumit son of Moti Lal Village Dulhera”.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that on 18.05.2023, the respondent No.2/prosecutrix left the company of her husband out of her own free will and came to the present petitioner and stayed in a live- in-relationship with him. Thereafter, the respondent No.2/prosecutrix also made a complaint to Superintendent of Police, Rohtak and the SHO Police Station, Meham with a prayer to protect her from her own family members including the complainant/respondent No.3. She clearly stated that she was in live-in-relationship with the present petitioner and her husband used to beat her up. Due to his torture, she had left her home on her own free will and was staying with the present petitioner. She also sworn an affidavit to the effect that she was aged about 31 years and was staying with the petitioner and her family was not authorized to take any legal action in the matter as she was major and voluntarily left her home. The respondent No.2/ prosecutrix and the petitioner also filed a petition i.e.CRWP-5163-2023 titled as “Jyoti and Anr. Vs. State of Haryana” before this Court and impleaded Sumit, complainant as a respondent No.3 in the said petition. The prosecutrix/respondent No.2 prayed for protecting her life and liberty as she was living with the present petitioner in a live-in- relationship. Ultimately, the said petition was disposed of by this Court on

02.08.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that on 09.06.2023, respondent No.2 was recovered by the police officials and under threat, her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C was got recorded, wherein, she levelled allegations against the present petitioner also. However, her MLR (Annexure P-4) clearly showed that there was no injury or sign of any struggle on her person. Learned counsel further submits that in fact, even at present, the petitioner and respondent No.2/prosecutrix are living together and again the respondent No.2 is sworn an affidavit, which has been annexed as (Annexure P-6). He further contends that since both of them are residing together, the F.I.R and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are an abuse of the process of the Court.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and prayed for dismissal of the petition, however