WPCRL/2441/2022
2023 Latest Caselaw 123 UK

               Office Notes,
              reports, orders
SL.           or proceedings
      Date                                        COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No           or directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                 WPCRL No. 2441 of 2022
                                 Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.

Shri Pradeep Chamiyal, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

Shri B.S. Bhandari, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3.

Petitioner is represented by his father, who is present in the Court today because petitioner is in judicial custody. An authorization has been executed by the petitioner in favour of his father.

Father of petitioner and respondent no. 3 are present, in person, before this Court. They are duly identified by their respective counsel.

I have also inspected Aadhar Cards of the parties. I am satisfied with the identity of the parties. Xerox Copies of Adhar Cards duly signed by the parties and counter signed by their respective counsel are taken on record.

Father of the petitioner has assured this Court that once, the petitioner is released from the jail, he will solemnize marriage of his son with private respondent no. 3, who is victim in this case. Respondent no. 3 submits that she has compromised the matter on the assurance given by the petitioner that he will marry her on his release from jail.

Learned State Counsel would submit that statements of the victim has been recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in the Court and as per her statements, petitioner and respondent no. 3 were known to each other for the last three years. They were in relationship.

Victim has also stated before this Court that she was in love with the petitioner and as yet, she loves him and FIR in this case has been lodged due to some misconceptions.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that present case is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sonu @ Subhash Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2022) 1 Crimes 142 (SC). Later on, this case is also followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Kharwar Vs. State of U.P. 2022, SCC online SC 1032.

In that view of the matter, this Court is of opinion that though offence of rape is alleged in this case but this case does not fall under the category of cases excepted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the two judgments i.e. Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688 for compromise, therefore, there is no impediment in allowing the compromise application.

Since the parties have entered into compromise, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the investigation and direct for the trial of the case.

Accordingly, writ petition and compounding application no. 1 of 2022 are allowed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. FIR No. 0303 of 2022 under Section 323, 376 IPC, registered at Police Station - Khatima District - Udham Singh Nagar, against the petitioner is hereby quashed.

Petitioner is in custody. It is directed that the jurisdictional Magistrate shall immediately issue release order of the petitioner to the concerned authorities.

This order is passed with a condition that if in future, petitioner fails to marry with the victim girl, as per undertaking given by him and his father, this order shall be recalled on the application of the respondent no. 3.

Let a free certified copy of this order be supplied to the learned State Counsel for early compliance.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.) 09.01.2023 (Grant urgent certified copy of this order, as per Rules) SKS