Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J.
Dinesh Sharma And Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State And Anr - Respondent
Crl M C No. 1002 of 2021
Decided On : 24-03-2021
Compromise - Quashing of FIR - Section 354, 354D, 506, 509, 34 IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIRs, emphasizing that heinous crimes like rape cannot be quashed even if the victim and accused have compromised. The court referred to the Supreme Court judgments in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, and State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors. to highlight the nature of offences that can be quashed and the importance of considering the impact on society and the victim. The court also emphasized the legislative intent behind the POCSO Act to protect children from sexual offences.
Fact of the Case:
The petition sought to quash FIR No.193/2018 for offences under Sections 354, 354D, 506, 509, 34 IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act, based on a compromise between the prosecutrix, her mother, and the accused. The prosecutrix alleged incidents of harassment, threats, and exploitation by the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court declined to quash the FIR, citing the heinous nature of the offences and the legislative intent behind the POCSO Act. It emphasized that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be used to quash offences like rape, even if the victim and accused have compromised.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court should exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR based on the compromise between the victim and accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Supreme Court judgments to establish that heinous and serious offences, especially those under special statutes like the POCSO Act, cannot be quashed based on compromise. It emphasized the impact on society and the victim, and the need to prevent abuse of the process of law.
Final Decision: The petition to quash the FIR was dismissed, and the court declined to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The application was also dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Subramonium Prasad, J. - Crl.M.A.5088/2021(Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C.1002/2021 & Crl.M.A.5089/2021(stay)
1. This petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing FIR No.193/2018 dated 07.05.2018 registered in Police Station Shakarpur for offences punishable under Sections 354, 354D, 506, 509, 34 IPC and Section 10 POCSO Act on the ground that the prosecutrix and the petitioners have compromised the matter.
2. The facts as stated in the charge sheet are that the prosecutrix in her complaint stated that she lives with her family and study in Class X. The allegation of the complaint reads as under:
"....Dinesh Sharma, a distant relative of ours who lives in Jalandhar Punjab came to our house in search of a job. He did not get a job for a few days, then he stayed at our house and started doing small work with my father for a few days. Everything was fine until a few days later he started looking at me with strange eyes when my mother and father were not at home. So he also started mocking me in a jiffy. One day I was alone at home. My mother and father had gone out, then Dinesh came and picked me up from behind and took me to another room with wrong intentions. I made a noise, then he left me and said that I made a mistake, it will not happen in future, when my mother and father came to the house, I told them everything, then my mother & father expelled him from the house at the same time, he apologized and said that it will not happen again. But do not tell this to the housemates, in February, 2017, the marriage of the Dinesh's sister Shobha was held. We went to Jalandhar Punjab to attend her marriage with the family. In that marriage, we also met Dinesh and his two nephews Deepak and Vishal who live in Bangalore. They asked me to be a friend, I refused him. One day I was sitting alone, Vishal and Deepak came, they said that if you will not accept our friendship, we will defame you because Dinesh has told us all about you & your family, he also has having your nude picture. Both of them tried to drag me into the room by holding my hand, so I released my hand and ran away and told all these things to my mother, my mother rebuked them and said that I had gathered the people of your house and call the police. Then Dinesh also came there and they all apologized and said that there will be no such mistake from our side. In March 2018, I got a call from mobile number 8873540617 on my phone number 7932283344 and the called said that I am Dinesh speaking and I want to be friend you. If you refuse, then I have your pictures while taking bath and toilet. I will kill your mother & father, I am afraid of this after talking to him, Dinesh started talking vulgarly to me, then on 24-4-18 I got a call from a number and he said that I am speaking of the nephew of Dinesh, you will have to be friend me too. Dinesh has given me all your photos, I will upload the same on Facebook, then on 24-4-18 I got a call from phone number 07019834248, he said that I am speaking Vishal's brother Deepak. Dinesh has given me all your photos too. You will have to be friend me as well, otherwise I will upload all your photos on Facebook, when I told him that I will complain to my family and police, he threatened to kill me and my family, then I got afraid, those people send me dirty messages, I told my family members these things in distress, then my mother has brought me to the police station. I request you that take a legal action against Dinesh, Deepak and vishal and protect the life & honour of me & my family....."
3. It is stated in the petition that the compromise has been entered into between the prosecutrix, who has now turned major, the mother of the prosecutrix and the petitioners. Her mother and the petitioners/accused herein have compromised the matter.
4. It is well settled that the power under Section 482 Cr.PC is to be distinguished from the powers which lies with the Court to compound the offences compounda
The main legal point established in the judgment is that heinous crimes like rape, especially those under special statutes like the POCSO Act, cannot be quashed based on compromise, emphasizing the i....
The power to quash criminal proceedings should be exercised sparingly and with caution, especially for heinous and serious offences, while considering the nature of the offence, the impact on society....
The court emphasized the careful exercise of the power to quash criminal proceedings, especially in cases involving heinous and serious offences, and highlighted the wide inherent powers of the High ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the quashing of criminal proceedings based on compromise between the parties should be considered in light of the nature and gravity of the of....
The court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences based on the settlement between the parties, to secure the ends of just....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise, especially in cases involving heinous and serious offences. The court emphasized....
The power to quash criminal proceedings should be sparingly exercised, especially in cases involving heinous and serious offences with a societal impact. The ends of justice and prevention of abuse o....
The court may quash FIRs in cases involving serious offences if the parties have resolved their dispute amicably and the likelihood of conviction is minimal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
