CRL.M.C. 1524/2021 Page 1 of 10

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

CRL.M.C. 1524/2021

Date of decision: AUGUST 16^th, 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

VIMLESH AGNIHOTRI & ORS

..... Petitioners

Through

Mr. Sonu Kumar, Advocate

versus

STATE & ANR

...... Respondents

Through

Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.

1.

This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed for quashing

FIR No.343/2019, dated 22.07.2019, registered at Police Station Aman

Vihar for offences under Section 376 IPC, on the ground that the petitioners

and the respondent No.2 have entered into a compromise.

2.

The respondent No.2 gave a complaint stating as under:

CRL.M.C. 1524/2021 Page 2 of 10

On the said complaint, FIR No.343/2019, dated 22.07.2019, was registered

against the petitioners herein at Police Station Aman Vihar for offences

under Sections 376 IPC.

3.

It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present

FIR is a counter blast to a complaint filed by the petitioner No.3 against the

husband of the respondent No.2, being FIR No.193/2019, dated 26.04.2019,

registered at Police Station Aman Vihar, for offence under Section 376 IPC.

4.

It is stated that the Police Report in FIR No.343/2019 has been filed in

the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Rohini District Courts, without the

arrest of the petitioners. It is also stated that the petitioner No.3 i.e. the

complainant in FIR No.193/2019 and the husband of the respondent No.2

are Advocates and are practising in Delhi.

5.

An affidavit has been filed by the respondent No.2 stating that the

matter has been compromised. The said affidavit reads as under:

CRL.M.C. 1524/2021 Page 3 of 10

6.

A perusal of the abovementioned facts would show that the parties

have registered cross-cases against each other for offences under Section

376 IPC. It is tragic to note that practising advocates belonging to the legal

fraternity are trivialising the offence of rape. Rape is not merely a physical

assault; it is often destructive of the whole personality of the victim. The act

of rape has the ability to scar the mental psyche of the victim and this trauma

can persist for years.

7.

In Shyam Narain v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 7 SCC 77, the

Supreme Court has observed as under:

CRL.M.C. 1524/2021 Page 4 of 10

The courts, therefore, shoulder a great responsibility while trying an accused

on charges of rape. It is a matter of grave concern that people are treating

these allegations in a very casual manner.

8.

The issue as to whether the High Courts, while exercising its

jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C, should quash an offence under

Section 376 IPC has come for consideration before the Supreme Court in a

number of cases. Rape is an offence against the society. The Supreme Court

has, time and again, directed that the High Court should not exercise its

jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash an offence of rape on the

ground that the parties have entered into a compromise.

9.

In Shimbhu v. State of Haryana, (2014) 13 SCC 318, the Supreme

Court has observed as under:

"20. Further, a compromise entered into between the

parties cannot be construed as a leading factor based

CRL.M.C. 1524/2021 Page 5 of 10

on which lesser punishment can be awarded. Rape is

a non-compoundable offence and it is an offence

against