Criminal Misc. Petition filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act citing reconciliation. Court held it cannot exercise jurisdiction given separation between husband and victim despite reconciliation claim.
Petition for quashing of FIR and ensuing criminal proceedings dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 1st DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL
CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) U/S 482 CRPC No. 365 OF 2022
Between:-
MOHAMMAD IQBAL MEER, S/O JAMALDEEN, PERMANENT RESIDENTOF VILLAGE DHAMAN, PO DULLANGAL, TEHSIL BANI, DISTT. KATHUA J & K, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VPO JEORI, TEHSI9L RAMPUR, DISTT. SHIMLA, H.P. ……….PETITIONERS
(BY M/S RAJINDER THAKUR AND KIRAN VERMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH ITS SECRETARY (HOME), TO THE GOVT. OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, H.P. 171002.
2. SMT. JAWALA DEVI D/O KALAM SINGH, W/O AVTAR SINGH, R/O VILLAGE PHADMAN, PO TANULI, DISTRICT HOSHIARPUR, PUNJAB.
3. SH. KALAM SINGH, S/O SH. LENTI RAM, R/O VILLAGE NANAN, PO BONDA, TEHSIL RAMPUR, DISTT. SHIMLA, H.P.
.…….RESPONDENTS
(M/S SUMESH RAJ, DINESH THAKUR AND SANJEEV SOOD, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERALS WITH MR. AMIT KUMAR DHUMAL, DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL AND MR. MANOJ BAGGA, ASSISTANT ADVOCATE GENEAL FOR R-1.
2
MR. SHYAM SINGH CHAUHAN, ADVOCATE FOR RS-2 AND 3)
___________________________________________________________
Whether approved for reporting: No
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court
passed the following:-
O R D E R
By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a prayer has been made by the petitioner for quashing of FIR 49/2014, dated 27.10.2014, registered under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, at Police Station Jhakri, District Shimla, H.P. as well as ensuing criminal proceedings, i.e. Sessions Trial No. 80/2015, titled as State of H.P. vs. Mohammad Iqbal Meer, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO), Rampur, District Shimla, H.P. on the ground that the matter stands reconciled between the parties. Though the complainant is present in the Court today, however, on a specific query put to the complainant by the Court, he has fairly stated that though earlier, the petitioner and the victim had married with each other but now they are not residing as husband and wife. In these peculiar circumstances, the Court is afraid that it cannot exercise the inherent jurisdiction vested in it under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash
3
the FIR in which besides Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, the statutory provisions of POCSO Act are also involved. Accordingly, this petition being devoid of merit is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge
June 01, 2022 (narender)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court can exercise inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR involving Section 376 IPC and POCSO Act when the parties are separated after marriage due to reconciliation
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Mohammad Iqbal Meer
State of Himachal Pradesh
Smt. Jawala Devi
Sh. Kalam Singh
Ajay Mohan Goel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
