Chandan Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3295 MP

                                       1              M.Cr.C. No. 11171-2022

     THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH INDORE
                          M.Cr.C. No. 11171-2022
      ( Chandan Singh s/o Devisingh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & another)
Indore, Dated: 09/03/2022

      Shri Pankaj Ajmera, learned counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri   Vaibhav    Bhagwat,      learned    Govt.    Advocate     for   the

respondent/State.

Shri Ritu Jaiswal, learned counsel for the complainant/objector.

Petitioner and the prosecutrix along with the child are present in

person.

Heard finally on the consent of all the parties.

This petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the

petitioner for quashment of First Indormation Report dated 14.8.2021

registered at Crime No.402/2021 at police station-Chainpur, District-

Khargone for commission of offence under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the

IPC and under Sections 3, 4, 5 & 6 of the Prevention of Children from

Sexual Offence Act as well as consequential proceedings.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is of entering into a sexual

relationship with the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage but

subsequently, he refused to marry with her and thus, the present FIR has

been lodged against him on 14.08.2021.

3. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner and the

prosecutrix had an affair and they also solemnized marriage subsequently,

on 11.11.2021. Their marriage certificate is also placed on record as

Annexure P/2. It is submitted that the FIR has bee lodged only account of

certain misunderstanding between them and now they have reconciled their

differences. It is also submitted that on 19.12.2021, the prosecutrix has

given birth to a girl child and presently residing with the petitioner as

husband and wife. Hence, this petition has been filed.

4. The attention of this Court has also been drawn to the decision

rendered by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.394-395 of 2021

passed in the case of Ananda D.V. v. State & another on 12.04.2021

wherein, in similar circumstances, the order of the High Court rejecting the

petition for quashment of the FIR was set aside, and the FIR was quashed;

and which judgment has also been relied upon by this Court in

Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.43974/2021 (Shubham @ Lala s/o Shri

Gopichand Thakur v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and another) order

dated 29.09.2021. Thus, it is submitted that the FIR in the present case be

also quashed as also the further proceedings of the Crime No.402/2021

registered at the police station Chainpur, District-Khargone.

5. On a query raised by this Court from the prosecutrix (who is present

in person), she has stated that she has already solemnized marriage with the

petitioner and does not wish to prosecute the matter any further, as all the

misunderstanding between them have already been resolved.

6. Ms.Ritu Jaiswal, Counsel for the complainant has also submitted that

the complainant has already filed the reply to the petition stating that the

complainant has no objection if the petition is allowed and the relief sought

be granted.

7. Counsel for the respondent / State has submitted that appropriate

orders be passed.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record as also

the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Ananda D.V. v.

State & another (supra).

9. The order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Ananda D.V.

v. State & another (supra) reads, as under: -

"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx These appeals take exception to the judgment and order dated 14.11.2019 and 30.01.2020 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition Criminal Nos. 2382 of 2019 and 287 of 2020 respectively, whereby the High Court rejected the criminal writ petitions for quashing of FIR No. 455 of 2013 dated 17.09.2013 in respect of offence registered at P.S. Safdarjung Enclave, Delhi and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.

The gravamen of the allegations in the FIR filed by the private respondent was that the appellant had promised her that he will marry her, which promise was not kept by the appellant. The FIR was registered on 17.09.2013.

It is not in dispute that after the registration of FIR, the parties were able to resolve their differences and eventually got married on 11.10.2014. The appellant as well as private respondent represented by Ms. Meenakshi Arora, learned senior counsel jointly state that they are enjoying happy married life. A joint request is, therefore, made on behalf of the appellant and the private respondent that the FIR registered on 17.09.2013 be quashed as it was the outcome of some misunderstanding between the parties.

Considering the nature of allegations in the FIR and the realization of the fact that due to miscommunication FIR came to be registered at the relevant point of time which

issues/misunderstanding have now been fully resolved and the parties are happily married since 11.10.2014, the basis of FIR does not survive. Rather registering such FIR was an ill-advised move on the part of the private respondent, is the stand now taken before us. It is seen that the appellant and private respondent are literate and well-informed persons and have jointly opted for quashing of the stated FIR.

Taking overall view of the matter, therefore, in the interest of justice, we accede to the joint request of quashing of FIR in the peculiar facts of the present case.

Hence, these appeals must succeed. The impugned judgment and order is set aside. Instead, the Writ Petition filed by the appellant for quashing is allowed, as a result of which, all steps taken on the basis of impugned FIR be treated as effaced from the record in law.

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of."

(emphasis supplied)

10. Testing the facts and circumstances of the present case, on the anvil

of the aforesaid decision rendered by the Supreme Court, this Court finds

that the petitioner has also made out a case for quashment of the FIR, as

both the parties have decided to bury their hatchets and prosecutrix has also

filed an affidavit that she had lodged the FIR under certain

misunderstanding and under the pressure from her parents. Thus, in such

circumstances, when the petitioner and the prosecutrix have also got

married on 11.11.2021 and they are having one child on the said wedlock,

this Court finds it expedient to allow the present petition.

11. Resultantly, the present M.Cr.C. stands allowed; and FIR registered

against the petitioner at Crime No.402/2021 dated 14.08.2021 (Annexure

P/1) at Police Station Chainpur, District Khargone (MP) for commission of

offence under Sections 366, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and

also under Sections 3, 4, 5 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offence Act, 2012, as also the subsequent charge sheet are hereby quashed

and the action taken against the petitioner pursuant to the lodging of FIR be

treated as effaced from record in law.

Certified copy, as per rules.

                                                            (Subodh Abhayankar)
moni                                                            JUDGE

       Digitally signed by MONI RAJU
       Date: 2022.03.10 16:59:16 +05'30'