BANTU RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is maintained by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be called as "the Code") for quashing of F.I.R No.42 of 2017, dated 11.4.2017, under Sections 363, 366A, 376 (2) (i) 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 3 (2) (V) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at Police Station Khundian, District Kangra, H.P.

(2.) Briefly stating the facts, giving rise to the present petition, as per the prosecution story, are that respondent No.2 solemnized marriage with Smt. Shanti Devi, in the year 2011, as per Hindu rites and customs. Smt. Shanti Devi's first marriage was solemnized with Raju son of Shr. Gurdabbaru, resident of Village Jaloan (Sarni), Post Office Paraisi, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi, but they got divorced, who had a boy, namely, Meena Ram and a girl prosecutrix (name withheld), when respondent No.2 married with Smt. Shanti Devi, both children are residing with him. At the time of occurrence, respondent No.3 studied in 9th standard. On 9.4.2017, in the morning, when respondent No.1 with his wife Smt. Shanti Devi, woke up, respondent No.2 was not present in her room, when they were searched, she was not found. Respondent No.1 telephonically call to her mobile number 9857803669, told that a boy, namely, Ravi Kumar has taken away, on asking her, she did not know the address of Ravi's house and also did not tell the whereabouts and thereafter disconnected the phone. Respondent No.1 fully assured that her daughter was carried away by Ravi Kumar. Pursuant thereto, statement of respondent No.2 came to the Police Station for lodging FIR against the petitioner. Now, the parties have entered into a compromise, vide Compromise Deed (Annexure P-6) dated 26th April, 2021, petitioner and respondent No.3 are married with whom they are living happily. 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 petitioners and the FIR/Challan, may be quashed and set aside.