Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.
Swatantra Kumar Jaysawal - Appellant
Versus
State & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition No. 1904 of 2021
Decided On : 03-01-2022
RAPE - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - 376/323/506 IPC - The court discussed the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the settled position enumerated in various cases including Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & anr., Shimbhu v. State of Haryana, State of M.P. v. Madanlal, State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., and Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & anr. The court emphasized that offences like rape are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society, and therefore, the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between the parties.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a government servant, was accused of raping the complainant on multiple occasions. The complainant alleged that the petitioner had concealed his marital status and had raped her against her will. The parties later settled the matter amicably and got married, leading to the petitioner's plea for quashing the FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition, emphasizing that the offence of rape is not private in nature and has a serious impact on society. It held that the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between the parties, despite their subsequent marriage.
Issues: The main issue was whether the criminal proceedings emanating from the FIR, with allegations of rape, could be quashed on the basis of settlement between the complainant and the petitioner, who subsequently got married.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the settled position enumerated in various cases, emphasizing that offences like rape are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society, and therefore, the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between the parties.
Final Decision: The petition for quashing the criminal proceedings was dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. - The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing and cancelling the FIR No. 219/2021 under Section 376/323/506 IPC registered at P.S. Patparganj Industrial area and all the proceedings thereof.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 25.06.2021 an information from PCR vide DD No.54a was received at PS Patparganj Industrial area, wherein it was reported that Complainant was not telling anything about complaint but asking for urgent police assistance. accordingly, IO SI Moolchand reached the place of incident i.e. ICD Patparganj Custom office and met the complainant, who told that she had a scuffle with her male friend Swatantra (petitioner herein) and he had tried to assault her. The Complainant was brought to PS Patparganj Industrial area and further enquiry proceedings were marked to WSI anjali Rana. Initially, the complainant revealed only about the scuffle and was hesitating in disclosing further facts, but later she disclosed regarding act of sexual assault having been committed upon her by accused Swatantra Jaysawal (petitioner herein) in his ICD Patparganj Office at 03.30 pm on 25.06.2021 when she had gone to talk to him regarding their marriage.
3. Complainant was taken to LBS Hospital for medical examination, wherein after due process of counselling by NGO, complainant gave history of sexual assault (fingering) by petitioner on 25.06.21 at 02:30 pm. She also gave history of sexual assault in the form of intercourse without her consent by petitioner/accused on 27.12.20 and 06.04.21. In her medical examination, history of molestation was alleged by complainant on 10.12.20 & 12.12.20.
4. after her medical examination, complainant narrated about the incidents that had happened with her and she gave a hand written complaint, wherein she stated that she came in contact with petitioner/accused Swatantra Jaysawal through website Jeevansathi.com. Petitioner/accused requested for the mobile number of complainant as he wanted to talk to her regarding their marriage. Petitioner/accused told her that he was aged about 32 years. He was unmarried and an officer in Customs. He concealed the fact regarding his first love marriage and that his first wife committed suicide for which case was going on in the Court.
5. Petitioner/accused met complainant at ayodhya and Lucknow on 10.12.20 and 12.12.20 respectively. Complainant told him to meet her parents, but he asked for more time to understand each other. They continued to talk and when complainant asked him to proceed with marriage talks, he called her to Faridabad. On 26.12.2020, petitioner/accused took complainant to Vivanta by Taj' Hotel in Faridabad and that night petitioner/accused raped her against her will. Petitioner/accused also told complainant that he would marry her in arya Samaj Mandir, but later on he made excuses that mandir was closed and also told her to return to ayodhaya. Petitioner/accused asked for one month's time to solemnize marriage, but then he did not pick her phone calls.
6. On 09.02.2021, complainant lodged a complaint with NCW through email and also informed petitioner/accused about this. Petitioner/accused contacted her and asked to withdraw that complaint and not to spoil their relations.
7. On 21.03.2021 petitioner/accused reached Bhopal and put vermilion on complainant and said that now they were husband and wife but he did not let her meet his family. In her complaint, the complainant further alleged that on 06.04.2021 also petitioner/accused raped her in car near Haldiram, akshardham. On 14.04.2021, complainant again lodged a complaint against petitioner/accused in NCW which finally reached Mahila Thana, Faridabad'. On 21.06.2021, petitioner/accused came to that police station and again he made promise to marry complainant and accordingly she withdrew her complaint.
8. It is further allege
Rape is a non-compoundable offence and cannot be quashed based on a compromise between the parties, as it is a crime against society with significant gravity.
Charges of rape are of grave concern and cannot be treated in a casual manner – FIR with allegations of rape cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Offences like rape cannot be quashed based on compromise as they have a serious impact on society.
Heinous and serious offenses like rape cannot be quashed based on a settlement between the parties, as they have a serious impact on society.
Point of law: Offence under Section 376 of IPC being a sexual offence would fall in category of heinous and serious offences and are to be treated against society and not against an individual one an....
Compromise between parties cannot quash serious criminal allegations like rape, which are offenses against society and not merely private disputes.
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
