IMPORTANT POINT
Serious offences like rape cannot be settled between the offender and the victim, as it has a serious impact on society. However, in exceptional cases where the prosecution materials do not disclose an offence of rape, quashment may be allowed.

ORDER :

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash Annexure.A2 Final Report in Crime No.71 of 2021 of Kuttampuzha Police Station, now pending as C.P. No.3 of 2022 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kothamangalam.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant, in detail. Perused the relevant materials available.

3. In this matter, the prosecution case is that the defacto complainant, who is a married lady having a child made acquaintance with the accused, who is the friend of her husband and they used to chat through online. In continuation of the same, on 10.00 am on 31.12.2020, the accused came to the house of the defacto complainant and committed rape on her by threatening that her naked photographs which were in possession of the accused would be sent to her husband and relatives. It is on this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 450, 376(1) and 506(i) of IPC.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, now the matter has been settled and the defacto complainant filed an affidavit supporting settlement, stating that she had no grievance in quashing the proceedings in Crime No.71 of 2021 of Kuttampuzha Police Station. In view of the settlement, the matter is liable to be quashed is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant also supported the settlement.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed settlement of this case on the ground that settlement of matters involving offence under Section 376 of IPC is not permissible under law.

7. Adverting to the power of this Court to quash criminal proceedings restoring to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is concerned, indubitably, in respect of serious offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., or other offences of mental depravity under IPC or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between the offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all. In a case of rape or attempt of rape, the conception of compromise under no circumstances can really be thought of. These are crimes against the body of a woman which is her own temple. These are offences which suffocate the breath of life and sully the reputation. And reputation, needless to emphasise, is the richest jewel one can conceive of in life. No one would allow it to be extinguished. When a human frame is defiled, the "purest treasure", is lost. Dignity of a woman is a part of her non-perishable and immortal self and no one should ever think of painting it in clay. There cannot be a compromise or settlement as it would be against her honour which matters the most. It is sacrosanct. Sometimes solace is given that the perpetrator of the crime has acceded to enter into wedlock with her which is nothing but putting pressure in an adroit manner; and that the Courts are to remain absolutely away from this subterfuge to adopt a soft approach to the case, for any kind of liberal approach has to be put in the compartment of spectacular error. Or to put it differently, it would be in the realm of a sanctuary of error. Such an attitude reflects lack of sensibility towards the dignity, the elan vital, of a woman. Any kind of liberal approach or thought of mediation in this regard is thoroughly and completely sans legal permissibility. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overri