IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, J.
Vinod @ Bishal Dutt - Appellant
Versus
State & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1431 of 2020; Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 5516 of 2021, 5517 of 2021
Decided On : 09-02-2021
Quashing of FIR - Marriage and Prosecution - The court quashed the FIR against the petitioner, who was charged under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, considering the marriage between the petitioner and the prosecutrix and the prosecutrix's desire to withdraw the complaint.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought the quashing of FIR No. 18/2020, u/s 376 IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at police station Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi, citing his marriage with the prosecutrix.
Finding of the Court:
The court, considering the marriage between the petitioner and the prosecutrix and the prosecutrix's desire to withdraw the complaint, quashed the FIR and all other proceedings arising therefrom.
Issues: Quashing of FIR, Marriage between Petitioner and Prosecutrix
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the marriage between the petitioner and the prosecutrix, the prosecutrix's desire to withdraw the complaint, and the observations of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a similar case involving love affair between teenagers.
Final Decision: The court quashed FIR No. 18/2020, u/s 376, registered at police station Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi, and all other proceedings arising therefrom.
JUDGMENT
Suresh Kumar Kait, J. - The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
1. Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 18/2020, u/s 376 IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at police station Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi in this petition.
2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State has drawn attention of this Court to the status report placed on record, wherein it is categorically stated that as per Ossification Test Report, dated 24.01.2020 obtained from Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, prosecutrix is more than 18 years of age but below 19 years and, resultantly, Section 6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act was removed from the FIR in question.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State further submits that factum of marriage of petitioner with prosecutrix/complainant in March, 2020 at Nanakram Swarg Ashram, Parmanand Chowk, GTB Nagar, Delhi stands verified.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that marriage between petitioner and prosecutrix was solemnized on 21.03.2020 as per Hindu rites in the presence of family members and relatives and a copy of marriage certificate to this effect has been placed on record. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that to enable the parties to lead a happy married life, this petition deserves to be allowed.
5. In a somewhat similar circumstances, a Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in CRM-M No.47266 of 2019, Pankaj @ Sikandar Kumar Vs. State of U.T., Chandigarh and another, decided on 05.03.2020, while quashing the proceedings for the offences under Section 376 IPC, has observed as under:-
"5. In normal circumstances, the Court would not entertain a matter when the non compoundable offences are heinous in nature and against the public. In the instant case, the offence, complained of is under Section 376 IPC, which is an offence of grave nature. In the eyes of law, the offence of rape is serious and non-compoundable and the Courts should not in ordinary circumstances interfere and quash the FIR that has been registered. However, there are always exceptions to the normal rules and certain categories of cases, which deserve consideration specially when it is a case of love affair between teenagers and due to fear of the society and pressure from the community one party alleges rape, cases where the accused and the victim are well known to each other and allegation of rape is levelled only because the accused refused to marry, as well as the age, educational maturity and the mental capacity, consequences of the same ought to be kept in mind when inclined to interfere."
6. Although, as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parbat Bhai Aahir and Ors. vs. State of Gujrat & Ors., (2017) AIR SC 4843, the FIR should not be quashed in case of rape as it is a heinous offence, but when complainant/prosecutrix herself takes the initiative and states that she made the complaint due to some misunderstanding and now wants to give quietus to the misunderstanding which arose between her and the petitioner, in my considered opinion, in such cases, there will be no purpose in continuing with the trial. Ultimately, if such direction is issued, the result will be of acquittal in favour of the accused, but substantial public time shall be wasted. A similar view was taken by this court in the case of Danish Ali v. State and Anr. in Crl. M.C. 1727/2019.
7. Taking into account the aforesaid facts and the fact that the petitioner and prosecutrix have already married on 21.03.2020, therefore, this Court is inclined to quash the present FIR as no useful purpose would be served in prosecuting petitioner any further.
8. For the reasons afore-recorded, FIR No. 18/2020, u/s 376, registered at police station Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi and all other proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.
9. The petition and pending applications are accordingly disposed of.
10. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.
The court may consider quashing the FIR and proceedings if the complainant/prosecutrix desires to withdraw the complaint and if there are exceptional circumstances, such as marriage between the accus....
The reconciliation of the marriage, the birth of the child, and the complainant's desire to end the proceedings can be grounds for quashing the FIR and related proceedings.
The court can consider quashing FIR and related proceedings when the complainant/prosecutrix herself takes the initiative to resolve the misunderstanding and does not wish to pursue the proceedings, ....
The court may quash FIRs for non-compoundable offenses under specific circumstances where misunderstandings are resolved, particularly involving parties who have married post-complaint.
The court established that marital reconciliation and mutual agreement can serve as grounds for quashing serious offences under IPC in particular circumstances, allowing the accused to avoid further ....
Court may quash FIR for serious offenses if complainant reconciles with the accused and expresses no desire to proceed, thereby conserving judicial resources.
The main legal point established is that exceptional circumstances, such as a consensual relationship, settlement, marriage, and the birth of children, can influence the court to quash an FIR in the ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.