SUNIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through Video Conferencing By way of instant petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 0178 of 2017 dated 12.9.2017, under Section 354-D of IPC, registered with Police Station Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, 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 the respondent No.2-complainant (herein after referred to as "the complainant"), who vide complaint dated 12.9.2017, sent to Superintendent of Police, Mandi, alleged that the petitioner Sunil Kumar, who is a hockey coach unauthorisedly entered her beauty parlor and then harassed her. Complainant respondent also alleged that the petitioner after having procured her mobile number from somewhere started giving telephonic calls and also demanded some money on certain occasions. Complainant also alleged that on few occasions, petitioner entered her bedroom and behaved indecently and as such, appropriate action in accordance with law be taken against him. In the aforesaid background, FIR sough to be quashed came to be lodged against the petitioner. After completion of investigation, police has presented the challan in the competent court of law, but before charge could be framed against the petitioner, parties to the lis have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter-se them by way of compromise placed on record.

(3.) On 30.12.2020, this Court having taken note of the averments contained in the compromise deemed it necessary to cause presence of parties to the lis, especially, complainant at whose behest FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings came to be lodged, so that correctness and genuineness of the compromise placed on record is ascertained.