Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) THIS misc. petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed by the petitioners praying that FIR No. 111/2013 registered at Police Station Purani Tonk(District Tonk) for the offence under Section 376 IPC may be quashed and set aside. Brief facts of the case are that the prosecutrix -Petitioner No. 1 lodged an FIR No. 111/2013 at Police Station Purani Tonk (District Tonk) for the offence under Section 376 IPC against the accused -Petitioner No. 2 alleging therein that the accused -petitioner sexually harassed the Petitioner No. 1 for a period of two and a half years on the pretext on solemnizing marriage with her and committed rape with her. During the course of investigation, the police recorded the statement of the prosecutrix. Thereafter, the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tonk on 27.09.2013 wherein she leveled allegations against the Petitioner No. 2 for committing rape. In the meantime, the Petitioner No. 1 -prosecutrix and Petitioner No. 2 -accused have entered into a compromise and they had also solemnized marriage with each other. Hence, the petitioners have preferred this misc. petition for quashing the FIR No. 111/2013 at Police Station Purani Tonk (District Tonk).
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that because of the pressure, the Petitioner No. 1 has given statement under Section 164 Cr. P.C. against Petitioner No. 2 and that statement was not willful. Petitioner No. 2 never sexually exploited her nor committed rape with her. The Petitioner No. 1 left the house of her parents on 28.09.2013 with the Petitioner No. 2 and she has converted herself into Islam and adopted the religion of Islam. Thereafter, they have performed Nikah as per the muslim rites. The Petitioner No. 1 was not having any intention to lodge the FIR against Petitioner No. 2 but out of anger and anguish she has lodged the said FIR when she heard the news of engagement of Petitioner No. 2 with some other lady. Thereafter, she gave statement under Section 164 Cr. P.C. due to the pressure of her parents. The Petitioner No. 2 is a practicing lawyer at Tonk. Now, he has performed Nikah with Petitioner No. 1 and both of them are living as husband and wife. Since both the petitioners are living together as husband and wife, therefore, no offence under Section 376 IPC is made out against the Petitioner No. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise also and they are present in the Court today. He, therefore, prayed that the compromise arrived at between the parties may be accepted and impugned FIR No. 111/2013 at Police Station Purani Tonk(District Tonk) be quashed and set aside. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioners and prayed for dismissal of the petition.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent -State and perused the material placed on record.;