Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, JJ.
Kapil Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi and Another – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1217 of 2022, SLP (Crl.) No. 5806 of 2022
Decided On : 10-08-2022
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 320 and 482 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376 – Rape – Quashing petition – Amicable settlement between parties – In heinous and serious offences like murder or rape, Court should not quash proceedings – Though Court should be slow in quashing proceedings wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, High Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving the charge for offence charged with – Court has also to take into consideration as to whether settlement between parties is going to result into harmony between them which may improve their mutual relationship – If application is made at a belated stage wherein evidence has been led and matter is at stage of arguments or judgment, the Court should be slow to exercise power to quash proceedings – However, if such application is made at an initial stage before commencement of trial, said factor will weigh with court in exercising its power. (Paras 12, 13 and 14)
(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 320 and 482 – Rape – Quashing petition – Amicable settlement between parties – Case and counter-case – Respondent No.2 is a young lady of 23 years – She feels that going through trial in one case, where she is a complainant and in other case, wherein she is accused would rob prime of her youth – In both cases, though charge-sheets have been filed, charges are yet to be framed and as such, trial has not yet commenced – Since respondent No.2 herself is not supporting prosecution case, even if criminal trial is permitted to go ahead, it will end in nothing else than an acquittal – If request of the parties is denied, it will be amounting to only adding one more criminal case to already overburdened criminal courts – Both criminal proceedings quashed. (Paras 15, 16, 17 and 18)
Facts of the case:
Instant appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 28.09.2021 passed by Single Judge of High Court of Delhi, thereby dismissing Criminal M.C. No. 1567 of 2021 vide which application filed by the respondent for quashing the proceedings under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code came to be rejected.
Findings of Court:
This is a fit case wherein extraordinary powers of this Court be exercised to quash criminal proceedings.
Result : Appeal allowed. Criminal Proceedings quashed.
JUDGMENT :
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 28.09.2021 passed by the learned single judge of the High Court of Delhi, thereby dismissing Criminal M.C. No. 1567 of 2021 vide which the application filed by the respondent for quashing the proceedings under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’) came to be rejected.
3. First Information Report (‘FIR’) No. 569 of 2020 came to be registered on 25.08.2020 at the instance of Respondent No. 2 herein. It is stated in the FIR that in February, 2020, she met with an accident and sustained injuries on her thigh and ankle. It is stated that she was helpless and financially disturbed. It was further stated that she was interested in joining a multinational company for future security and was in search of a job. In her search, the complainant came to know that the appellant was looking for a personal assistant. It is further the prosecution case that there was an exchange of messages between the Respondent No. 2 and the appellant. Thereafter, the Respondent No. 2 sent her location to the appellant and the appellant went to her house. Thereafter, the incident of rape is alleged to have taken place.
4. It appears that after the aforesaid FIR was lodged, another FIR came to be lodged by the present appellant against Respondent No. 2 making allegations of extortion.
5. In both the cases, arising out of FIR No. 824 of 2020 registered at Police Station Mehrauli, charge-sheet has already been filed.
6. It further appears that subsequently, in the case arising out of Section 376 of the IPC, that is, FIR No. 569 of 2020, the matter was amicably settled and therefore, the petition for quashing the proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. came to be filed. By the impugned order, the High Court has dismissed the said petition.
7. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, vide order dated 14.07.2022, we had directed both the appellant as well as Respondent No. 2 to personally remain present in the Court.
8. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the appellant as well as Respondent No. 2 are personally present in the Court.
9. In the morning session, when the matter was argued at length, we had heard Dr. N. Pradeep Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, learned Additional Solicitor General (“learned ASG” for short) for Respondent No. 1. Mr. Banerjee, learned ASG submitted that the present crime is a heinous crime and is against the society at large. He submitted that it is a settled law that in serious and heinous crime, the Court should not permit quashing of the proceedings even if there is consent between the parties.
10. Since, none appeared for Respondent No. 2, we requested Mr. Rauf Rahim, learned counsel to act as an Amicus Curiae and also appear for her. We had also requested the learned ASG and Mr. Rauf Rahim, learned counsel to speak to Respondent No. 2 to find out as to whether the consent for putting an end to this proceeding is out of her own will or under duress or coercion. We had posted the matter to be heard in the afternoon session.
11. When the matter was called out in the afternoon session, learned ASG as well as Mr. Rauf Rahim informed us that they had spoken to Respondent No. 2. They stated that from the conversation they had with Respondent No. 2, it was apparent that the consent given by Respondent No. 2 was voluntarily and without any coercion and duress. It was informed that the Respondent No. 2, in order to live in peace, wants to bring an end to the criminal proceedings.
12. No doubt that the learned ASG is right in relying on various judgments of this Court which reiterate the legal position that in heinous and serious offences like murder or rape, the Court should not quash the proceedings. It will be relevant to refer to paragraph 29.5 to 29.7 of the judgment of this Court in the case of Narender Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 which read thus:
“29.5 Whil
(1) Quashing petition – Though Court should be slow in quashing proceedings wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, High Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists m....
The court may quash proceedings for serious offences if a voluntary compromise exists and the likelihood of conviction is remote, promoting harmony between parties.
The court has the power to quash proceedings even in cases involving heinous and serious offences, considering factors such as the stage of the proceedings, the possibility of conviction, and the imp....
Parties can compound offences for serious crimes like rape under unique circumstances, enabling courts to quash proceedings when further prosecution serves no purpose and the victim expresses a desir....
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 ....
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 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 inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings even in cases where the offences are non-compoundable, if the C....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
