IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
xxxxxxxxxx – Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
Crl. M.C. No. 2031 of 2024
Decided On : 22-07-2024
QUASHING - CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS - Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Sections 366, 342, 370, 370A, 376(2)(n) of IPC; Sections 5(l)(j)(ii) read with 6, 4 read with 3(a) of POCSO Act - The court discussed the legal framework surrounding the quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., emphasizing that serious offences like rape and those under the POCSO Act cannot be settled privately due to their societal implications. However, in this case, the marriage of the accused and the victim, along with their children, warranted a deviation from the norm, allowing for the quashing of proceedings to promote family stability and the welfare of the children.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, accused in a case involving the kidnapping and sexual assault of a minor, sought to quash the FIR and final report after the victim and the first accused married and settled their differences.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the serious nature of the offences but ultimately decided to quash the proceedings due to the marriage and family circumstances of the parties involved, emphasizing the importance of the children's well-being.
Issues: Whether the court can quash criminal proceedings for serious offences like rape and POCSO Act violations based on a settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: While the court generally cannot quash serious offences based on private settlements due to their impact on society, exceptions can be made in cases where the parties have married and have children, prioritizing family stability and welfare.
Final Decision: The petition to quash the FIR and final report was allowed, and all further proceedings were quashed.
ORDER :
1. 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.A2 FIR and Annexure.A3 Final Report in Crime No. 311 of 2021 of Chengamanad Police Station, Ernakulam, now pending as S.C. No. 837 of 2021 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court, Perumbavoor. The petitioners herein are the accused in the above case.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, 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, at about 10.30 am on 21.02.2021, the 1st accused herein kidnapped the victim aged 17 years from the lawful custody of her guardians/parents and subjected her to sexual intercourse, after detaining her under his illegal custody and as a result of the sexual assault at the instance of the 1st accused, the minor victim became pregnant. The prosecution allegation against the 2nd accused is that, the 2nd accused, who is the mother of the victim failed to inform the matter to the Police. On this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 366, 342, 370, 370A, 376(2)(n) of Indian Penal Code and Sections 5(l)(j)(ii) read with 6, 4 read with 3(a) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred as ‘POCSO Act’ for short) as against the 1st accused and Section 21(1) of the POCSO Act as against the 2nd accused.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, now the matter has been settled and the victim filed an affidavit supporting settlement, stating that the 1st accused married her on 25.08.2021 and they have been living happily as husband and wife. Copy of the marriage certificate also has been produced. In view of the settlement, the matter is liable to be quashed is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the victim also supported the settlement.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the 1st accused and the victim got married and two children also born to them and they are living happily.
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
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 and Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh
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....
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 can quash proceedings under the POCSO Act based on genuine settlements, especially when the accused and victim are married, to prevent injustice and promote family harmony.
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....
Serious offences under the POCSO Act cannot be quashed based on settlements, as they affect public interest and the dignity of victims.
Ends of justice are higher than ends of mere law though justice has got to be administered in accordance with laws enacted by Legislature.
Point of law: Section 320 of Cr. P.C does not limit or control exercise of powers vested in Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C
The court ruled that serious offences under the POCSO Act, particularly sexual assault against minors, cannot be quashed based on victim retraction or compromise, emphasizing public interest in prose....
Point of law: Section 320 of Cr. P.C does not limit or control exercise of powers vested in Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C.
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.