- (1.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State.
(2.) THE F.I.R of Rajmahal (Radhanagar) P.S. Case no.334 of 2012 instituted under Sections 341, 342, 323, 376 of the Indian Penal Code is being sought to be quashed on the ground that the parties, i.e, prosecutrix and the petitioner no.1 have resolved their dispute whereby petitioner no.1 has married the prosecutrix and both are living happily. Learned counsel appearing appearing for the petitioners submits that in such situation, F.I.R should be quashed, in view of the decision rendered in a case of Arun Goel vs.State of N.C.T of Delhi and another, [Special Leave to Appeal (Cr.) No.2900 of 2009]. Allegation what has been made against the petitioner no.1 is that he having entered into a room 6/5/2014 Page 33 Mintu Kashyap Versus State Of Jharkhand of the prosecutrix committed rape upon her. On such allegation, a case was registered as Rajmahal (Radhanagar) P.S. Case no.334 of 2012 under Section 341, 342, 323, 376 of the Indian Penal Code. In course of time, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the prosecutrix entered into a compromise with the petitioner no.1 and thereby the petitioner no.1 married the prosecutrix and both are living together happily. In such situation, a prayer has been made to quash the F.I.R in view of the decision rendered in a case referred to above.
(3.) THIS factual position is being admitted by the learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party no.2.;