Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 125
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR, J
Satish – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 39119/2024
Aakash Chandra Rathore,Advocate General
Serious offences, especially against minors, cannot be quashed based on compromise due to their societal impact and the need to protect victims' dignity.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 528 - Quashing of FIR - Petition filed for quashing FIR based on compromise between parties - Victim, aged 15 years at the time of incident, alleged rape and subsequent pregnancy - Court emphasized that serious offences cannot be quashed merely due to compromise, as they have a significant societal impact. (Paras 6, 32)
(B) Compromise in serious offences - The court reiterated that offences like rape cannot be settled through compromise, as they undermine the dignity of the victim and societal norms. (Paras 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The victim, aged around 15 years, was reported missing and later alleged that the accused enticed her and committed rape, resulting in pregnancy. The parties later settled the dispute, but the court noted the serious nature of the allegations and the victim's age.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the compromise was likely coerced and emphasized the need to protect the victim's dignity and societal values.
Issues: The main issues included whether the FIR could be quashed based on a compromise and the implications of the victim's age and circumstances surrounding the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that serious offences like rape cannot be quashed based on compromise, as they have a profound impact on society and the dignity of the victim must be upheld.
Result: Petition dismissed.
ORDER
This petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ,2023 is filed requesting quashing of FIR registered at crime No. 420/2023 on the basis of compromise between the parties.
2/ As per the case of prosecution, father of victim report to P.S. Kasrawad District Khargone that his daughter aged around 15 years and 7 months (date of birth 2.2.2008) is missing since the intervening night of 4.9.2023 and 5.9.2023. He suspects that some unknown person might have enticed and taken his daughter. The Police Station Kasrawad registered FIR at crime No. 420/2023 for offence punishable under section 363 of IPC against unknown person. After recovering the victim, her statements were recorded. Victim alleged that accused/Satish has enticed and taken her and committed rape on her. She got pregnant. On such allegations, prosecution for offence punishable under Sections 363 , 366 , 376(2)(n) of IPC , section 5L, 6 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(va) of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act were added. Satish was arrested on 13.1.2024. Material for DNA examination was forwarded. On completion of investigation, final report was submitted.
3/ It is stated in the petition that the victim is aged around 21 years. She is married to the accused and she has delivered a son. Both the parties have amicably settled the dispute. The parents of the victim also agreed to settlement. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was a matter of consensual relationship between two young persons. Victim and her suckling child is residing with the family of petitioner/accused. She desires to live with the petitioner. Therefore, in view of amicable settlement, the FIR and prosecution against the petitioner deserves to be quashed. Learned counsel referred to the order dated 3.5.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 43911 of 2022 by the Coordinate Bench of this Court to buttress his contentions.
4/ This Court vide order dated 25.9.2024 had directed the parties to appear before the Principal Registrar of this Court (applicant through VC) for recording their statement and for verification of factum of compromise. The Principal Registrar has submitted his report on 27.9.2024 and verified the factum of compromise.
5/ Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6/ Recently, the Supreme Court in the case of Ramjilal Bairwa Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2024 INSC 846 held that though the accused and the complainant had settled the matter, but in cases of such nature, the offence has a serious impact on the society. The fact, that in view of compromise entered into between the parties, the chance of a conviction is bleak, cannot be a ground to abruptly terminate the investigation by quashing FIR and further proceedings by invoking the power u/S 482 of Cr.P.C. Relevant paragraphs of the judgement are as under:-
25. Thus, in unambiguous terms this Court held that before exercising the power under Section 482, Cr. PC the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime besides observing and holding that heinous and serious offences could not be quashed even though a victim or victim's family and the offender had settled the dispute. This Court held that such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on the society. Having understood the position of law on the second question that it is the bounden duty of the court concerned to consider whether the compromise is just and fair besides being free from undue pressure we will proceed to consider the matter further ………………………
28. A bare perusal of the impugned order and in the light of the observations and binding conclusions in Gian Singh's case (supra), bearing in mind the allegations in the subject FIR, it would reveal that the High Court has misread and misapplied the law laid down in Gian Singh's case (supra) to quash the subject FIR and all further proceedings based in pursuance thereof.
We are at a loss to understand how
