HC quashes FIR in rape case after accused, sufferer tie knot
Chandigarh, January 25
The Punjab and Haryana Excessive Court docket has quashed an FIR in a rape case on the idea of a compromise after making it clear that the probabilities of conviction gave the impression to be bleak and prolongation of the proceedings will merely wastage of beneficial judicial time. The courts are already over-strained, Justice Jagmohan Bansal of the Excessive Court docket added.
The ruling got here in a case the place the petitioner-accused and the complainant solemnised marriage ceremony and have been residing collectively. The matter was positioned earlier than Justice Bansal’s Bench after the accused filed a petition for quashing the FIR registered on November 20, 2020, for dishonest and rape below Sections 420 and 376 of the IPC on the Division 6 police station in District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar. Instructions have been additionally looked for quashing all different consequential proceedings on the idea of compromise/affidavit dated February 12, 2021.
Showing earlier than Justice Bansal’s Bench, the state counsel on instruction from the investigating officer submitted that he had no objection if the FIR and consequent proceedings have been quashed in view of the compromise.
In the course of the course of listening to, Justice Bansal took on report a report by the Jalandhar Chief Judicial Justice of the Peace by way of HC order dated September 22, 2022. Amongst different issues, the judicial officer noticed that the compromise was real, voluntary, with none coercion or undue affect and was a results of free will of the events in view of the statements of the complainant and the accused/petitioner.
In his detailed order, Justice Bansal relied on Supreme Court docket’s earlier judgments coping with the HC’s energy below Part 482 of the CrPC to quash non-compoundable offences on the idea of compromise between the disputing events.
Justice Bansal added: “From the perusal of the enclosed FIR, the trial courtroom report and the compromise arrived between the events, it transpires that the contesting events have amicably resolved their situation. Thus, no helpful objective could be served by persevering with the proceedings. There seems to be no probability of conviction, the continuance of the proceedings would waste beneficial judicial time and it.”
No probability of conviction
There seems to be no probability of conviction, the continuance of the proceedings will simply waste the precious time and it’s a well-known proven fact that courts are already overburdened. — Justice Jagmohan Bansal