Crl. Misc. No. M-26480 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-26480 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 1.9.2011 Mehrudin alias Raju ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. C.S. Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. Rajan Gupta, J (oral). This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.128 dated 13th July, 2011, under Section 376 IPC, registered at Police Station Salem Tabri, Ludhiana City on the basis of affidavit, Annexure P-2, allegedly submitted by the complainant Pinki Devi. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that in view of the affidavit of the complainant, Annexure P-2, FIR registered under Section 376 IPC deserves to be quashed. According to counsel, a perusal of the affidavit shows that the complainant had lodged the FIR on the basis of suspicion and thus, nothing survives in the case. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case. FIR was lodged by Pinki Devi, who stated that she along with her husband was residing at a house in Raja Ram Gali, Police Station Salem Tabri, Ludhiana City. On the intervening night of 9/10.6.2011, she was alone at home. Her husband had gone to the factory for work. At about 10/11 P.M., her neighbour accused Crl. Misc. No. M-26480 of 2011 2 Mehrudin alias Raju entered her house and committed rape on her. On statement of Pinki Devi, the instant FIR was lodged and investigation ensured. Quashing of the FIR has been sought on the basis of affidavit, Annexure P-2 which is stated to have been executed after one month of the occurrence. It appears that investigation of the case is still in progress. Under the circumstances, I am of the considered view that no ground for quashing of FIR is made out on the basis of said affidavit. Offence under Section 376 IPC apart from being non-compoundable, is serious in nature. In the case reported as Manoj Sharma vs. State & Ors., 2008 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 827, rendered by the Apex Court, it has been held that there are certain offences, which are serious in nature and cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise. The relevant para of the said judgment reads thus: “34. I am expressing this opinion because Shri B.B. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent has rightly expressed his concern that the decision in B.S. Joshi's case (supra) should not be understood to have meant that Judges can quash any kind of criminal case merely because there has been a compromise between the parties. After all, a crime is an offence against society, and not merely against a private individual.” In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and judgment in Manoj Sharma's case (supra), I find that relief of quashing of FIR deserves to be rejected. The petition is, thus, hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE 1.9.2011 'rajpal'