SAKSHI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR No. 09/20 dtd. 7/3/2020, under Ss. 376 of IPC and Ss. 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, registered with Women Police Station Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P., as well as consequent proceedings, if any, pending before the court below, on the basis of compromise/amicable settlement arrived inter-se parties.

(2.) Averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, reveal that FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings came to be lodged at the behest of petitioner No.1-complainant (victim-prosecutrix), aged 17 years, who alleged that she studies in BA, 1st year, and knows petitioner No.2 Krishan Kumar for almost 1- 1/2 years. She also disclosed to the police that she had been talking continuously to petitioner No.2, who wanted to solemnize marriage with her. She alleged that one day, petitioner-accused took her towards Chamunda on his bike and sexually assaulted her on the pretext of marriage. She alleged that when she became pregnant, she informed petitioner No.2 but he blocked her on his mobile phone and refused to marry. She alleged that on 5/2/2020, she was taken to the hospital on account of pain in abdomen, where it transpired that she is pregnant. In the aforesaid background, FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings, came to be instituted against the petitioner No.2. After completion of investigation, police presented challan in the competent court of law, but before same could be taken to its logical end, both petitioner No.1 and petitioner No. 2 have solemnized marriage on 30/9/2020 as is evident from Annexure P-3 and since then, they have been living happily together as husband and wife. Pleadings further reveal that petitioner No.1 has given birth to one female child, who is now one year old and as such, both the parties have approached this Court in the instant proceedings for quashing of FIR as well as consequent proceedings, if any, pending in the competent court of law.

(3.) Vide order dtd. 30/10/2021, this Court while issuing notices to the respondent-State deemed it necessary to cause presence of the petitioners, especially petitioner No.1- victim-prosecutrix as well as her mother petitioner No.3 so that factum with regard to correctness and genuineness of the compromise placed on record could be ascertained.