VIDYA DEVI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR No. 10 dtd. 22/2/2019, under Sec. 67A of Information Technology Act and Sec. 354A of IPC, registered with Women Police Station Nahan, District Sirmaur, 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 respondent No.2- complainant namely Manisha, who alleged that person namely Reena Thakur had been sending obscene messages about her on Hemant Chauhan's Facebook. She alleged that above named Reena Thakur has not only used dirty words about both of them, but also sent dirty messages and as such, appropriate action in accordance with law be taken against her. During investigation, it transpired that petitioner herein Ms. Vidya Devi had been sending the obscene messages on the Facebook of Hemant Chauhan with whom she wanted to solemnize marriage. After completion of investigation, police presented challan in the competent court of law, but before same could be taken to its logical end, petitioner and respondent No.2 entered into compromise, whereby both the parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter-se them and as such, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings.

(3.) Vide order dtd. 12/10/2022, this Court while directing the respondent-State to verify the factum with regard to compromise, if any, arrived inter-se parties deemed it necessary to cause presence of the parties especially respondent No.2, so that factum with regard to compromise could be ascertained. Though instructions of respondent-State are awaited, but respondent No.2 Manisha has come present and is being represented by Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate. She on oath states that she of her own volition and without there being any external pressure has entered into compromise, whereby both the parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably. She states that since petitioner, who is her relative, has apologized for her misbehavior and misconduct and further undertaken not to repeat such act in future, she does not wish to prosecute the case further and shall have no objection in case prayer made by the petitioner for quashing of FIR as well as consequent proceedings is accepted. While admitting contents of the compromise to be correct, she also admits her signature on the same. Her statement is taken on record.