In a recent judgement by the Delhi High Court, a significant legal decision was made regarding the quashing of an FIR in a marriage settlement case. The court considered the settlement between the parties and their marriage to quash the FIR, highlighting the nuances of exercising inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code. The judgement holds relevance in understanding the complexities of legal proceedings and the impact of settlements in criminal cases.
Facts
- The petitioner and Respondent No.2 have married each other on 30.09.2022.
- The marriage has been registered in the Office of the SDM, Saraswati Vihar, New Delhi.
- A status report verifying the marriage certificate issued from the office of SDM Saraswati Vihar has been placed on record.
- The request for quashing the FIR is due to the fact that the parties have married each other and are happily living together.
- The FIR was registered after a misunderstanding between the parties despite having consensual physical relations established.
- The settlement between the parties and the marriage are reasons for seeking the quashing of the FIR.
Arguments
- The offence under Section 376 IPC involves serious violation of the right to bodily integrity and dignity of a woman
- The possibility of a settlement between the offender and victim cannot be a ground to quash the offence as it would go against public interest and the interest of the victim
- The Court must keep in mind the societal interest and the need for deterrence while considering quashing of such offences
- Referring to previous Supreme Court decisions, it is established that in cases of serious offences like rape, the settlement is not a relevant factor for quashing the charges
Analysis
- The court quashed the FIR dated 16.08.2020 against the appellant under Sections 417, 420 and 376 IPC.
- The Supreme Court considered previous decisions and observations in similar cases.
- Court highlighted the gravity of offences like murder or rape and the general reluctance to quash proceedings in such cases.
- Reiterated the importance of timing of settlement in deciding to exercise the power under Section 482 of the Code.
- Highlighted that the inherent power under Section 482 should be used to secure justice or prevent abuse of court processes.
- Court referenced various case laws emphasizing that Section 320 Cr.P.C. does not limit the power of High Courts to quash proceedings.
- Emphasized the need to consider the facts and circumstances of each case to determine the appropriateness of invoking inherent powers.
- Distinguished between High Court’s power to quash proceedings under Section 482 and the power to compound offences under Section 320 of the Code.
- Referenced a specific case where the court quashed an FIR under Sections 417, 420 and 376 IPC based on settlement between the parties.
- High Court must exercise power under Section 482 with utmost care and caution, especially in serious cases like Section 376 IPC.
- The power under Section 482 is not controlled by Section 320 Cr.P.C.
- Quashing of serious offences like rape based solely on settlement/marriage is not always warranted, but can be done in specific cases.
- The High Court’s power to quash prosecution is different from compounding of offences by parties before trial court.
- The High Court should consider timing and effects of settlement/marriage, chances of conviction, and evidence before quashing proceedings.
- High Court can show benevolence in quashing based on circumstances, but should refrain once evidence is almost complete.
- Settling serious offences like murder, rape, etc., may not be grounds for quashing prosecution.
- Accepting settlement for quashing criminal proceedings may be more liberal if done immediately after alleged offence and during investigation.
- The Court does not have a blanket rule for quashing; it depends on the specific circumstances of each case.
- High Court can quash proceedings when there is no chance of conviction and the trial would be futile.
- High Court should not act as an appellate court but consider evidence before deciding on quashing.
- Parties have entered into an MoU and married after registration of FIR
- Case is at initial stage as charge is yet to be framed
- No evidence to show forceful relations between the parties
Decision
- The High Court has the authority to quash proceedings under Section 376 IPC if the facts justify it.
- The present petition is allowed, and FIR No 15/2022 registered under Section 376(2)(n)/354/323/506 IPC at P.S. Paschim Vihar East, Delhi, along with the proceedings, are quashed.
Case Title: SANJAY BABU RINKU Vs. THE STATE GOVT OF NCT DELHI & ANR. (2024:DHC:3909)
Case Number: CRL.M.C.-7363/2023
