Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sudhir Kumar Jain, J.
Sakh Alam @ Shekh Alam - Appellant
Versus
The State (Govt. of Nct, Delhi) & Anr. - Respondents
Cr.M.C. 7825 of 2023 & Cr.M.A. 29177 of 2023
Decided On : 30-10-2023
Quashing of FIR - Settlement of Disputes - Section 376 IPC, Section 6 POCSO Act - The court discussed the scope of inherent jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C. and the principles laid down in various Supreme Court judgments regarding quashing of criminal proceedings. The court emphasized that serious offences like section 376 IPC cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between the parties.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR registered under section 376 IPC and section 6 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner and the respondent no. 2 had settled their disputes and got married, leading to the petitioner's plea for quashing the FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations in the FIR were serious in nature, and the mere settlement between the parties, including their subsequent marriage, did not warrant the quashing of the FIR.
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR registered under section 376 IPC and section 6 POCSO Act could be quashed based on the settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles laid down in various Supreme Court judgments, emphasizing that serious offences like section 376 IPC cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between the parties.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition and held that the FIR registered under section 376 IPC and section 6 POCSO Act, along with consequential proceedings, could not be quashed.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The present petition is filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR bearing no. 0360/2020 dated 20.04.2020 registered under section 376 IPC and section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) at P.S. Baba Haridas Nagar along with consequential proceedings including judicial proceedings stated to be pending in the court of Sh. Manu Goel Kharb, ASJ (FTSC)(POCSO)-02, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi/Successor Court.
2. Issue notice.
3. Mr. Utkarsh, Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by the Investigating Officer SI Rashmi, P.S. Baba Haridas Nagar, accepts notice on behalf of the State/respondent no. 1. The respondent no. 2 is present in person alongwith counsel and accepts notice.
4. The perusal of FIR bearing no. 0360/2020 reflects that it was got registered on the basis of complaint made by the respondent no. 2 pertaining to the allegations as mentioned in the FIR wherein the petitioner was implicated. The petitioner and the respondent no. 2 are identified by their respective counsel as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Rashmi, P.S. Baba Haridas Nagar. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed under section 376 IPC and section 6 POCSO Act and the trial is stated to be pending in the court of Sh. Manu Goel Kharb, ASJ (FTSC)(POCSO)- 02, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi/Successor Court.
5. The respective counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the respondent no. 2 stated that the petitioner and the respondent no. 2 have settled their pending disputes and got married on 28.03.2023 at the office of the Marriage Registrar, Motihari, Bihar vide Registration Certificate bearing no. 04/2023 and thereafter they are leading a happy married life with mutual love, affection and understanding and have become the parents of one male child namely Taymur. The respective counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the respondent no. 2 prayed that under the given facts and circumstances of the case and after considering the future prospects of the petitioner and the respondent no. 2, the present petition be allowed and FIR bearing no. 0360/2020 registered under section 376 IPC and section 6 POCSO Act at P.S. Baba Haridas Nagar be quashed alongwith consequential proceedings including judicial proceedings stated to be pending in the court of Sh. Manu Goel Kharb, ASJ (FTSC) (POCSO)-02, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi/Successor Court.
6. The respondent no. 2 stated that she has settled the pending disputes with the petitioner and got married to him out of her own free will and without any fear, force and coercion. She further stated that she does not have any objection if the present petition is allowed and FIR bearing no. 0360/2020 registered under section 376 IPC and section 6 POCSO Act at P.S. Baba Haridas Nagar is quashed alongwith consequential proceedings including judicial proceedings stated to be pending in the court of Sh. Manu Goel Kharb, ASJ (FTSC) (POCSO)-02, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi/Successor Court.
7. The Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1/State raised objections regarding the present petition and stated that the present FIR pertains to the offences punishable under section 376 IPC and section 6 of POCSO Act which are non-compoundable offences and the allegations as mentioned in the FIR are serious in nature, as such the present FIR cannot be quashed.
8. The extraordinary power under section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and with great care and caution and can be used to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure ends of justice and the exercise of inherent powers entirely depends on facts and circumstances of each case. The Supreme Court in Sushil Suri v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, (2011) 5 SCC 708, considered the scope and ambit of the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court and observed as under:
16. Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure itself envisages three circumstances under w
Serious offences like section 376 IPC cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between the parties.
The court's decision was based on the principle that the power to quash criminal proceedings should be exercised to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of the court, consideri....
The court's decision was based on the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering the nature and gravity of the offences, the settlement between the p....
Inherent powers under section 482 of Code can be used to prevent abuse of process of law and to secure ends of justice.#12;
The High Court can quash non-compoundable offences under Section 482 when the parties amicably settle their dispute and continuation of proceedings would cause extreme injustice.
Heinous and serious offences cannot be quashed based on a compromise between the parties, as per the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
It is well settled that powers under section 482 have no limits. Of course, where there is more power, it becomes necessary to exercise utmost care and caution while invoking such powers.
Offence of Rape – Compounding of offence - Interest of justice will be met, in case, the proceedings are quashed, as the parties have already compromised the matter.
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
