IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. Badharudeen, J.
Sajeer.T – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor And Ors. – Respondents
CRL.MC NO. 2955 OF 2022
Decided On : 26-06-2024
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The defacto complainant, a married lady, alleged sexual intercourse with the accused and his promise to marry her, leading to the prosecution alleging offences under Sections 376(1) and 376(2)(n) of IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the promise of marriage was an impossibility, and the materials did not sufficiently support the offence under Section 376 of IPC. The defacto complainant filed an affidavit supporting the quashing of proceedings.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the quashing of proceedings based on settlement, particularly in the context of serious offences like rape.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that serious offences like rape cannot be compromised or settled, considering their impact on society and the public interest in punishing offenders. It referred to various legal principles and precedents to support this stance.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and quashed all further proceedings pursuant to the FIR in Crime No.773/2021 of Nadakkavu Police Station, Kozhikode.
ORDER :
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure.A1 FIR in Crime No.773/2021 of Nadakkavu Police Station, Kozhikode.
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 on 26.12.2016 and maintained relationship with him. In continuation of the same, they had sexual intercourse during the period from August 2017 to September 2021. In the First Information Statement given by the defacto complainant, the said fact is stated and also stated that the accused offered to marry the defacto complainant. It is on this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 376(1) and 376(2)(n) of IPC.
4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, both parties are not fit for marriage, since both are married and having children. 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.773/2021 of Nadakkavu Police Station, Kozhikode. 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. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, since the investigation as such has been stayed because of the pendency of this petition, apart from the FIS, no further steps moved as part of the investigation.
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 da
Arun Singh and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh Through its Secretary and Another
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Others v. State of Gujarat and Another
Ram Gopal & Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
Serious offences like rape cannot be compromised or settled, as they have a significant impact on society and public interest in punishing offenders.
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 ....
The court established that while serious offences typically cannot be settled privately, the unique circumstances of marriage and children can justify quashing proceedings to protect family integrity....
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....
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 depravit....
Proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in cases of serious offences when a settlement is reached, provided the likelihood of conviction is minimal and supports the harmonious relationsh....
The power to quash criminal proceedings should be sparingly exercised, especially in cases involving heinous and serious offences with a societal impact. The ends of justice and prevention of abuse o....
The court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if a voluntary compromise is reached and the likelihood of conviction is deemed remote.
The settlement between the parties and mutual divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, can justify the quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code, especially in....
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.