Heinous and serious offenses like rape cannot be quashed based on a settlement between the parties, as they have a serious impact on society.

Headnote:
Rape - Criminal Proceedings - Sections 376/377 IPC, Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act - 376, 377, 4
Fact of the Case:

The complainant alleged that the accused, a practicing lawyer, established physical relations with her under false promises of marriage and demanded dowry. The parties later settled their disputes and married.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the settlement between the parties did not mitigate the gravity of the allegations, emphasizing that rape is an offense against society.
Issues: Settlement's impact on criminal proceedings, gravity of rape allegations, exercise of court's jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court cited various Supreme Court cases to emphasize that heinous and serious offenses like rape cannot be quashed based on a settlement between the parties, as they have a serious impact on society.
Final Decision: The petition to quash the criminal proceedings was dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. - The present petition has been filed under Section 482 read with Section 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of proceedings arising out of FIR No. 285/2019 under Sections 376/377 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Budh Vihar.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that on 25.10.2019, the complainant came to the PS and gave a written complaint, wherein she alleged that she uploaded her profile on matrimonial site Jeevansathi.Com, where she came in contact with accused Akash Gupta (petitioner No. 3 herein), who introduced himself as a practicing lawyer having his office at Chamber No 192, Civil Wing, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi.

3. Complainant's family visited the house of accused Akash Gupta (petitioner No. 3 herein) but initially his family members denied for marriage but petitioner No. 3 remained in contact with the complainant and assured her that he will convince his family members for their marriage. After some time, petitioner No. 3 informed the complainant that his family member got agreed for the marriage.

4. Accordingly, complainant's parents again visited the house of petitioner No. 3 and clearly asked petitioner No. 1 and 2 who are parents of petitioner No.3, if, they have any demand, upon which, they denied to have any demand, hence the marriage was fixed. On 04.08.2019, Roka ceremony was performed at the house of petitioner No.3, wherein complainant's father spent Rs 85,970/-. On 28.08.2019, ring ceremony was also performed at Hotel Seven Seas, Lawrence Road, Britania Chowk, Delhi, wherein complainant's father again spent Rs 6,69,200/-. After ring ceremony, petitioner No. 3 used to meet complainant at her house and restaurants. Complainant further alleged that once petitioner No. 3 asked her that it is tough to find a flat on rent being Advocate, hence asked her to find a flat in complainant's name. Complainant relied upon the words of petitioner No. 3 and handed over her ID's and four post dated cheques total amounting of Rs 1.2 lac to the landlord at the instance of petitioner No. 3.

5. It is further alleged by the complainant that by the passage of time petitioner No. 3 used to come to her house and started touching her. Whenever complainant refused, he assured her that they are soon getting married and on the pretext of marriage, accused/petitioner No. 3 committed unnatural and natural sex with the complainant without her consent. On 23.09.2019, petitioner No. 3 again established physical relations with the complainant against her will after giving her false promise of marriage. Complainant further alleged that on 31.08.2019, petitioner No. 3 took her to Dehradoon in his car where he booked a hotel and stayed together and during the stay petitioner No. 3 committed unnatural and natural sex with the complainant on pretext of marriage.

6. It is further alleged that on 05.10.2019, petitioner No. 3 asked the complainant to call her parents as his parents wants to meet them. Accordingly, on 14.10.2019, parents of complainant visited the house of petitioner No. 3, where his parents Sh. Rakesh Gupta and Radhika Gupta (petitioner No. 1 and 2 herein) and petitioner No. 3 demanded Rs 25 Lakh as dowry from the patents of complainant. Parents of complainant showed their inability to arrange such a huge amount. Petitioner No. 1 and 2 threatened the complainant and her family members that if they will not fulfill their demands, they will not marry their son with the complainant. Complainant also tried to convince petitioner No. 3, but he said that he used to make physical relations with the girls and after that make such demand.

7. Complainant was medically examined vide MLC No 1899/19 and accordingly on the basis of the complaint given by the complainant the present FIR No. 285/19 U/s 376/377 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was registered at police station Budh Vihar and the investigation went underway.

8. I have heard the Ld. counsel for the