SUDERSHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition, under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be called as "the Code"), has been maintained by the petitioner for quashing of F.I.R No.59/2015 dtd. 1/6/2015, under Ss. 366 and 363 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter to be called as "IPC") registered at Police Station, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, H.P., alongwith all consequent proceedings arising out of the said F.I.R., pending before the learned trial Court.

(2.) Briefly stating the facts giving rise to the present petition, as per the prosecution story, are that respondent No.3 made a complaint to the police alleging therein that her daughter (respondent No.2) herein, who was studying in 10+2 in Government Senior Secondary School, Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, informed her on 22/5/2015, while she was going to Kangra bus stand to get her bus- pass, when she did not returned home, she made a call on her mobile phone, she informed that she was staying with her friend. Respondent No.2 did not turn back her home on the next day, but a phone call from a boy was received, who disclosed that respondent No.2 is with him and safe. As a sequel to the statement of respondent No.3, police registered an FIR against the petitioner. Thereafter, respondent No.2 produced before the learned Magistrate, where her statement, under Sec. 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, was recorded wherein she has stated that she had gone from home out of her own free will and volition. Now, the parties have entered into a compromise, vide Compromise Deed (Annexure P-6) dtd. 23/10/2021, stating therein that she does not want to pursue the case against the petitioner. Hence, the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that as the parties have compromised the matter, no purpose will be served by keeping the proceedings against the petitioner and the FIR/Challan, may be quashed and set aside.