Point of Law : Rape - Amicable settlement - Quash of FIR - Inherit powers of High Court - Power is not be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc - Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society - Hence not to be quashed merely on basis of compromise between victim and offender.

ORDER :

The petitioners, who are the accused in Crime No. 734 of 2017 of Kodungallur Police Station, Thrissur District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366A, 376 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 read with Section 3, Section 6 read with Section 5 and Section 17 read with Section 16 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2002, have filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the FIR, the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer and its further proceedings now pending as S.C. No. 836 of 2020 before the 1st Additional District and Sessions Court, Thrissur.

2. Briefly stated the facts as emerge from the records are that on 23.03.2017 at 12.30 p.m. the petitioners/accused have procured the victim, who is aged only 17 years, from her lawful custody and took her forcibly to the rental house of the 2nd accused and the 1st accused committed rape on her. The 2nd accused, who is a child in conflict with law also abetted the 1st accused to commit rape on her after procuring her with the 1st accused and thereby they have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. The learned counsel has contended that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and now the entire matter has been settled between the parties and the victim does not intend to proceed with the case against the petitioners. An affidavit has also been sworn to by her, stating that the 1st petitioner has married her under the Special Marriage Act on 08.12.2020 and now they are living together as husband and wife. Hence, this petition to quash Annexure A1 FIR, Annexure A2 final report and all further proceedings initiated in S.C. No.836 of 2017 now pending before the 1st Additional District and Sessions Court, Thrissur.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.

5. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 366A, 376 and 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short IPC). Apart from the provisions of the IPC, they have been charged for the offences under Sections 4 read with 3, 6 read with 5 and 17 read with 16 of the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short POCSO Act). Now this application is filed by the petitioner with a plea to quash the entire proceedings initiated against them exercising the inherent powers of this Court as the dispute has been settled amicably and the 1st petitioner had married the victim under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act and they are living together. Annexure A3 is produced as the copy of the marriage certificate dated 08.12.2020. As referred above the 2nd respondent, the victim, in the affidavit stated that she has no complaints against the petitioners and now she has no intention to proceed against them. So, the question posed for consideration is whether the FIR registered for an offence of rape alleged to have been committed by the 1st petitioner after procuring a minor girl from her lawful custody with the 2nd petitioner, could be quashed and whether the consequent criminal proceedings initiated thereto, also could be quashed in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The Apex Court in a catena of decisions laid down the principles, which govern the exercise of the jurisdiction of the Court and held that the inherent power given to the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is with the purpose to prevent abuse of process of the court and with the object of advancement of justice and that the powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is an exception and not the rule which should be used sparingly with great caution and circumspection. Here, the main offence alleged is rape that too alleged to have been committed on a minor girl. It is incontrovertible that the charges levelled against the petitioners are of serious nature. Of- course the 1st petitioner claims to have married her. Whether