27. cr appln 4521-10.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4521 OF 2010 Siddhu @ Siddharam Kashinath Fulari .. Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondent Mr. P.G. Sarda for the Applicant Mr. V.V. Purvant for Respondent No. 2 Ms. A.A. Mane, APP for the State CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 14th OCTOBER, 2010. P.C.: 1. Leave to amend. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2. Heard learned advocate for the applicant-original accused and learned advocate for respondent no. 2-original complainant. As respondent no. 2 is minor, she is represented by her father and natural guardian Mr. Rama Krishna Koli. 3. The applicant is seeking quashing of C.R. No. 86 of 2010 of Vijapur Naka Police Station, Dist. Solapur and the proceedings relating thereto being Sessions Case No. 261 of 2010 which is pending before the Sessions Court, Solapur. 1 27. cr appln 4521-10.doc The said case is under Section 376 of IPC. 4. The prosecution case is that the applicant committed rape on the prosecutrix Laxmi. 5. The learned advocate for the respondent no.2 states that the matter has been amicably settled between the partie, hence, the FIR and the proceedings relating thereto be quashed. The parents of the Laxmi are present before this Court. They have stated that Laxmi and the applicant were having love affair. Due to the said incident, Laxmi had conceived and she delivered a baby boy on 30th September 2010. Parents of the applicant are also present before this Court and they have stated that they will get their son married to the prosecutrix as soon as she attains majority. The Parents of Laxmi and the applicant have stated that it is agreed that Laxmi and the applicant would marry each other after Laxmi attains the age of maturity. Hence, they have requested to quash the FIR and proceedings relating thereto. The father of Laxmi has also filed affidavit stating therein that he has no objection to quash the FIR and proceedings relating thereto. His affidavits are taken on record and marked "X" for identification. 6. Father of Laxmi stated that if FIR and the proceedings 2 27. cr appln 4521-10.doc relating thereto are not quashed, the applicant would remain in jail and in such case, it would not be possible for Laxmi and the applicant to get married as soon as she attains majority, due to this, Laxmi and baby boy would also suffer great hardship, hence, he requested to quash the FIR and proceedings relating thereto. 7. I have perused the FIR lodged by Laxmi. In the FIR, nowhere, she has stated that intercourse which took place between her and the applicant was forcible in nature or against her will or without her consent. However, the fact remains that Laxmi was minor at the time of the incident, hence, it is a case of statutory rape and would be covered under Section 376 of IPC. 8. In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2008 SC 1969, it is observed as follows: "We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly 3 27. cr appln 4521-10.doc over burdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilized in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law". 9 In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Ors. reported in 1977 Cr.L.J. 1125 the Supreme Court referred to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and observed that in exercise of the wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. The Supreme Court further observed that this power is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. 10. The ratio of above decisions squarely applies to the present case. In view of the above decisions, in my opinion, there is no reason as to why the criminal complaint filed by respondent no. 2-original complainant should not be quashed. Thus, in view of above decisions and in view of the amicable 4 27. cr appln 4521-10.doc settlement between the parties, I am inclined to quash the FIR and proceedings relating thereto. Hence, Criminal Application is allowed. 11 Thus, in view of the above decisions, in view of amicable settlement between the parties and the affidavits filed before this Court, I am inclined to quash the FIR and the proceedings relating thereto. 12. C.R. No. 86 of 2010 of Vijapur Naka Police Station, Solapur and the proceedings relating thereto i.e. Sessions Case No. 261 of 2010 pending before the Sessions Court, Solapur is quashed. 13. Application is disposed of. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 5 27. cr appln 4521-10.doc 6