CRM No. M-4343 of 2011 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-4343 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision :17.02.2011 Balraj Kumar alias Raju & others .......... petitioners Versus State of Punjab & another ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present : Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Guninder S. Brar, AAG, Punjab for respondent No.1-State. Mr. R.K. Singla, Advocate for respondent No.2- complainant. **** RITU BAHRI, J. (ORAL) This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been moved seeking quashing of FIR No. 5 dated 15.1.2011 under Sections 365, 376, 342, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise effected between the petitioners and respondent No.2. Brief facts of the case are :- That initially a criminal miscellaneous No. M-38431 of 2010 of 2011 was filed by Piaro w/o Balraj Kumar and Balraj Kumar son of Shri Malla Ram, aged about 33 years for protection of life and CRM No. M-4343 of 2011 -2- liberty of the petitioners and direction that the respondents should not harass, humiliate and interfere in the matrimonial life of the petitioners. When this case was taken for hearing on 27.12.2010, on a quarry by the court, the girl expressed that she was forcibly got into the matrimony by petitioner No.2. In view of her statement criminal miscellaneous No. M-38431 of 2010 of 2011 was dismissed as withdrawn. On the same day, Habeas Corpus petition i.e. Crl. W.P. No. 2583 of 2010 was filed by Sarwan Singh, father of the girl Piaro. This petition was disposed of, as the custody of the girl was handed over to petitioner Sarwan Singh (father). In view thereof, the petition was dismissed as having become infructuous. Thereafter the present FIR No. 5 dated 15.1.2011 under Sections 365, 376, 342, 34 IPC was registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar by respondent No.2-Piaro. Today counsel for respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit of respondent No.2 Piaro, who is also present in the Court. As per this affidavit, she has stated that she stayed with Balraj Kumar for one or two days and filed a petition for protection of life and liberty. She changed her mind and went back with her parents. After the Criminal miscellaneous No. M-38431 of 2010 of 2011 was disposed of on 27.12.2010 she got registered FIR No. 5 dated 15.1.2011 under Sections 365, 376, 342, 34 IPC at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar, under pressure built by her parents and relations, now as per intervention of the respectables of the village, she has entered into a compromise and the deponent wants to settle again in life and does not want to pursue this FIR which would hamper the CRM No. M-4343 of 2011 -3- petitioner. She has no objection if FIR No. 5 dated 15.1.2011 under Sections 365, 376, 342, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar, is quashed. The respondent No.2 has been identified by her counsel Sh. R.K. Singla. This court had directed respondent No.2 to deposit Rs. 5,000/- as cost with the Punjab State Legal Services Authority, Chandigarh. This Court was first apprised of a petition where protection was sought on the ground of marriage between Piaro and Balraj Kumar. Lateron, the girl went back to her parents as she did not want to stay with her husband. She has also alleged that on a pressure exercised by her family she get registered FIR No. 5 dated 15.1.2011 under Sections 365, 376, 342, 34 IPC at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar. Once a petition is filed for seeking protection of life and liberty and then subsequently an FIR under Sections 365, 376, 342, 34 IPC has been registered. A compromise has been effected and prayer for quashing is being made. Offence under Section 376 IPC is non-compoundable offence. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR(crl.) 1052 has considered this aspect that to bring about peace and harmony in society inherent powers of the Court can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings so that the parties may reside peacefully. The Court process is not to be exercised first to ask for protection on the pretext of marriage and then take a somersault. Once the matter has been disposed of by this Court on 27.12.2010, a CRM No. M-4343 of 2011 -4- resort to register FIR under Section 376 IPC should not have been done by respondent-Piaro. Taking serious note of the situation, a direction was given to her to deposit Rs. 5,000/- as cost with the State Legal Services Authority, Punjab. This has been done so that in future frivolous registration of FIR is not done, which is lateron sought to be quashed as it would hamper the reputation of the girl and she would get marriage lateron. In the present case the girl in her affidavit dated 9.2.2011 has denied that she was ever married to Balraj Kumar rather she stated that she stayed with him for one or two days. This goes to prove that her earlier petition stating that she was married to Balraj Kumar was on wrong statement of facts. However, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case that the girl is about 21 years of age and she has a long life ahead her, no useful purpose would be served to proceed with the FIR No. 5 dated 15.1.2011 under Sections 365, 376, 342, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar. In view of the above facts, this criminal miscellaneous is allowed, the FIR No. 5 dated 15.1.2011 under Sections 365, 376, 342, 34 IPC registered at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners. 17.02.2011 (RITU BAHRI) 'sp' JUDGE