Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sanjay Gwale vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 October, 2023
Author: Vishal Dhagat
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
ON THE 17 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 3416 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. SANJAY GWALE S/O BALIRAM GWALE, AGED
ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE JOB
R/O VILLAGE GHORLATOLA PANDWADA, P.S.
UGALI, DISTRICT SEONI (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. A NOT MENTION (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI VISHAL VINCENT RAJENDRA DANIEL - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH THE
POLICE STATION HOUSE UGALI DISTRICT SEONI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SANTOSH YADAV - DY. GOVT. ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India
making a prayer for quashing of FIR No.162/2022 registered at Police Station-
Ugali District-Seoni (MP) for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376, 376(2)(n)
of IPC & Section 3, 4, 5L & 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, charge-sheet and
consequent proceedings which are pending in the Court of Special Judge
(POCSO), Seoni in SC No.67/2022.
2. Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that a joint writ petition is
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETI TIWARI
Signing time: 20-10-2023
13:52:53
filed by petitioner No.1 and Petitioner No.2-prosecutrix for quashing of FIR,
charge-sheet and consequent proceedings. It is submitted that prosecutrix has
stated in her affidavit that she was having love relationship with petitioner No.1
and she went along with petitioner no.1 on 16.07.2022 on her own free will. She
is major. Father of prosecutrix has also given an affidavit regarding love affair
of his daughter with petitioner No.1 and they have no objection on said
relationship and marriage. Learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon the
judgment passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.52027/2021 (Rahul s/o Shri
Fakirsingh Rajput Vs. State of MP & Vicitm). It is submitted that in said
judgment, reliance is placed on judgment rendered by Apex Court in Criminal
Appeal Nos.394-395/2021 (Ananda D.V. Vs. State & Another) . It is submitted
that on the basis of said judgment, FIR lodged against the accused person was
quashed. In these circumstances, FIR, charge-sheet & consequential
proceedings may be quashed.
3. Heard learned counsel for parties.
4. Relevant paragraph of said judgment passed by the Supreme Court in
the case of Ananda D.V. Vs. 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
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETI TIWARI
Signing time: 20-10-2023
13:52:53
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 MCRC No.52027/2021senior 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
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETI TIWARI
Signing time: 20-10-2023
13:52:53
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)
5. Now, it is to be seen whether facts of the present case are similar to
that of aforesaid case or not ?
6. FIR No.162/2022 for having committed offence under Sections 363
was registered against an unknown person. It is mentioned in FIR that on
08.07.2022, they found their daughter missing from the house, therefore,
complaint was lodged with police and it was stated that minor girl has been
induced by some person and removed from their guardianship. Prosecutrix was
recovered and examined by doctor. Her statements were recorded by police
and vaginal swab and other articles were sent for FSL examination. Prosecutrix
has given statement that she was having love relationship with petitioner No.1.
Petitioner No.1 had gifted her a mobile phone so that they can talk with each
other. She eloped with petitioner No.1 on 07.07.2022. She went to the house of
petitioner No.1 and, thereafter, they went to Chhapara and to Lalbarra, Balaghat
and reached Nagpur and they were living in a rented house in Nagpur and doing
labour. Petitioner is said to have committed forceful intercourse. Later on, she
was recovered from Nagpur. She has filed an affidavit before trial Court that
she is major and not minor. Petition has been filed by prosecutrix before this
Court that she is married to petitioner No.1 and if petitioner No.1 is prosecuted,
same will disturb her married life. Relationship between them was consensual
and same was made out of mutual love and fondness for each other. Both of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETI TIWARI
Signing time: 20-10-2023
13:52:53
them are living together.
7. From aforesaid facts, which are available in case diary and also on
perusal of averments made in petition, it is clear that Petitioner Nos.1 & 2
eloped from the house together due to love relationship with each other.
Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are married with each other. Their marital life will be
affected if Petitioner No.1 is prosecuted. Petitioner Nos.1 & 2 are happy
together and want to live peaceful life.
8. In these circumstances, to secure ends of justice, this Court deems it
appropriate to exercise it's inherent power to quash the FIR, and proceedings
registered against the petitioner No.1.
9. Resultantly, petition stands allowed. FIR No.162/2022 registered
against petitioner No.1 at Police Station-Ugali District-Seoni (MP) for offences
under Sections 363, 366, 376, 376(2)(n) of IPC & Section 3, 4, 5L & 6 of
POCSO Act, 2012 so also subsequent charge-sheet and consequential
proceedings which are pending in the Court of Special Judge (POCSO), Seoni
in SC No.67/2022 are quashed.
10. Writ petition filed by petitioners is allowed and disposed off.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHAL DHAGAT)
JUDGE
nd
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETI TIWARI
Signing time: 20-10-2023
13:52:53
