DILEEP Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Sri G.P. Singh learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

(2.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Special Case No. 85 of 2017 (State vs. Sitaram and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 347 of 2016, under section 363, 366, 376 IPC and section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Samther, District Jhansi on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.

(3.) From the side of the learned counsel for the applicant it is mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the application that the accused-applicant no. 1 and opposite party no. 3 were in love with each other. The opposite party no. 3 is an illiterate lady and has never studied in any school, however, as per her personal knowledge, she was major in the year 2016. The accused-applicant no.1 and opposite party no. 3 would to solemnize their marriage with each other after consent of the family members but the family members of opposite party no. 3 were not ready to solemnize the marriage, hence the opposite party no. 3 left her parents' house of her own free will, where-after the opposite party no. 2 had lodged FIR against the applicants on 21.10.2016 which has been registered as Case Crime No. 347 of 2016 under section 363, 376, 506 IPC and section 8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Samther, District Jhansi. Pursuant to the said FIR, police recovered the opposite party no. 3 on 26.10.2016 and was given in custody of her parents and due to being in custody of her parents, under coercion of her parents, she has given statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. against the applicants but even in that statement she has not made any allegation of rape against the applicant. But despite that the police has filed charge-sheet against the applicant no.1 on 24.01.2017 and against the accused applicant nos. 2 and 3 on 31.03.2017 under sections 363, 376 IPC and section 8 POCSO Act. Later on in the year 2018, the family members of the applicants as well as the family members of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 were ready to solemnize the marriage of the opposite party no. 3 with the applicant no.1 and accordingly, the same was solemnized in Shiva Adarsh Vivah Samiti, Rani Luxmi Bai Nagar on 12.4.2018, regarding which marriage certificate has been issued by the said institution on the same day, which is annexed as Annexure-4.Thereafter, the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 and the applicants entered into a compromise on 09.07.2019 to the effect that the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 do not want to pursue the criminal case against the applicants and would withdraw the said case, a compromise deed dated 09.07.2019 is annexed as Annexure-6. The trial court has taken cognizance over the charge-sheet because offence has been committed and bears Special Case No.85 of 2017 State vs. Sita Ram and others and till date no witness has been examined, which is revealed from the order sheet, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-7. Due to the compromise, there is no need to proceed further in this case as the applicant no. 1 and opposite party no. 3 are living happily as husband and wife and both the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 did not want to contest this case and therefore it was prayed that the proceedings of the case should be quashed.