Himachal Pradesh High Court
Amandeep Kaushal vs State Of H.P And Anr on 29 November, 2023
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Cr.MMO No. 645 of 2023
Decided on: 29th November, 2023
.
Amandeep Kaushal .......Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P and anr. ...Respondents
Coram
of
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner: rt Mr. Servedaman Rathore,
Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Addl. A.G.
and Ms. Leena Guleria, Dy. A.G
for respondent No.1.
Ms. Deepmala Sharma, Legal Aid
Counsel for respondent No.2.
Virender Singh, Judge (Oral)
By way of the present application, indulgence of
this Court has been sought to place on record the
Compromise Deed dated 10.10.2023, which has taken place
between the parties during the pendency of the petition.
2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2
has not made any objection, whereas no reply, to this
application, on behalf of respondent No.1, has been filed.
1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
3. Considering the fact that the parties, i.e., petitioner
and respondent No.2, have compromised the matter, the
.
application is allowed. The compromise deed is ordered to be
taken on record.
Application stands disposed of.
of
4. Petitioner-Amandeep Kaushal has filed the present
petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
rt
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.'), with a prayer to quash
FIR No. 9 of 2022, dated 2.6.2022, under Sections 376 and 313
of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC'),
registered with Women Police Station, Nahan, District Sirmour,
H.P., as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, pending in the
Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC
(POCSO/Rape), Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P. (hereinafter
referred to as the 'learned trial Court') vide Sessions Trial No. 6
of 2023.
5. As per case, set-up by the petitioner, in the present
petition, respondent No.2 had lodged the aforesaid FIR
against him as a tool for settling some personal scores. After
the registration of the FIR, the police has investigated the
matter and thereafter, report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., was
filed against the petitioner.
.
6. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been
made to allow the petition by quashing the FIR, as well as, the
resultant proceedings pending against him before the learned
Trial Court.
of
7. The prayer, so made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, has been opposed by the learned Additional
rt
Advocate General, on the ground, that the crime committed,
in this case, is not just against the individual, but, against the
society at large.
8. On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been
made to dismiss the petition.
9. Respondent No.2, who, at one point of time, has
lodged the FIR against the petitioner, when, appeared before
this Court, has stated, on oath, that due to some bonafide
mistakes and misunderstandings, she has lodged the FIR
against the petitioner and during the pendency of the case,
with the efforts made by the friends, elders, as well as, the
respectables of the society, the misunderstandings between
them have now been cleared and the matter has been
compromised between them vide compromise, Annexure A-1.
She has specifically stated that the compromise has been
.
effected out of her free will and without any pressure.
10. Lastly, she has stated that she has no objection if
the petition is allowed, as prayed for. Respondent No.2 has
duly identified her signatures over the compromise, encircled
of
at point 'A'.
11. Similar type of statement has also been made by
rt
the petitioner.
12. Heard.
13. In view of the above facts, this Court is of the view
that the offence allegedly stated by respondent No.2 does not
fall within the definition of mental depravity, as the FIR has
been registered on 2.6.2022, alleging the fact that she was
being raped by the petitioner for more than last seven years.
Respondent No.2 has given her age as 26 years. Meaning
thereby, at the time of the alleged occurrence, both the
parties were mature and considering the fact that the parties
have cleared their misunderstandings and the terms and
conditions of the settlement have been reduced into writing
vide compromise Annexure A-1, in such situation, permitting to
continue with the trial against the petitioner is nothing, but, the
abuse of process of law. The chances of success of the case
.
of the prosecution against the petitioner are also not so bright.
When, the compromise has voluntarily been entered between
the parties, then, acceptance of the same will save the
precious judicial time of the learned trial Court and the
of
learned trial Court will be in a position to devote such time for
the decision of some other serious matters.
rt
14. Considering all these facts, the petition is allowed.
FIR No. 9 of 2022, dated 2.6.2022, under Sections 376 and 313
of IPC, registered with Women Police Station, Nahan, District
Sirmour, H.P., as well as, proceedings resultant thereto,
pending in the court of learned Trial Court vide Sessions Trial
No. 6 of 2023, are ordered to be quashed.
15. The compromise deed, as well as, statements of
the parties, recorded today shall form part of this order.
16. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed
of.
November 29, 2023 ( Virender Singh )
(mamta) Judge
