Govind Mathur - (1.) THIS misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is preferred to quash FIR No.320/2009, pending investigation at Police Station Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.
(2.) IN brief, facts of the case are that at the instance of Shri Niyamat Khan a criminal case was lodged at Police Station Bhadra against petitioner No.1, for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. When the investigation was going on, Miss Asma @ Nagma daughter of Shri Niyamat Khan appeared before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nohar and got her statements recorded as per provisions of Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded. The relevant portion of that reads as follows: (Matter in other language) It is also relevant to note that Shri Niyamat Khan also filed a Habeas Corpus Petition before this court wherein Miss Asma was produced before this court and her custody was given to her parents. A misc. petition has now been preferred by petitioners Sheokat Ali and Smt. Asma with assertion that they went out of their village at their own will, as such, no offence was committed by petitioner No.1 Sheokat Ali, thus, the FIR No. 320/2009 be quashed. Mr. Moti Singh appearing on behalf of complainant Shri Niyamat Khan submits that the complainant is having no objection, if the FIR be quashed as prayed. However, Ms. Rajlaxmi, learned Public Prosecutor submits that the offence under investigation is non-com-poundable and the age of petitioner No.2 is only 15 years and some odd days, therefore, she being minor, no latitude as claimed by the petitioners should be given by this Court. To substantiate age of the petitioner reliance is placed on a mark-sheet relating to petitioner No.2, wherein her date of birth is shown as 11.7.1995. In rejoinder, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that as a matter of fact, as per medical examination the probable age of petitioner No.2 is more than 18 years. It is further submitted that while getting the state ments recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the petitioner No.2 mentioned her age as 19 years. 7 Having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, specially looking to the fact that father of petitioner No.2 also want to conclude the entire episode relating to missing of her daughter, and also that in the entire case there is no allegation of commission of any offence under Section 376 IPC I deem it appropriate to quash this FIR, without entering into the issue relating to age of petitioner No.2 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also in the case of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana & Anr.1 held that prime consideration before the court is welfare of the parties litigating and looking to that, the High Court may exercise its discretion under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the investigation also even where the offences under investigation are non-compoundable. In the instant case too, the facts demands to exercise of such broad judicial discretion. 9. Accordingly, this misc. petition is allowed, the FIR No. 320/2009 pending investigation at Police Station Bhadra, District Hanumangarh stands quashed. Petition allowed. ;