The single judge bench of Allahabad High Court comprising Hon’ble Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava dismissed the application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings and held that it is legally impermissible to quash a rape case or cases under the POCSO Act based on a compromise between the accused and the victim.
Brief Facts:
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused/ applicants for quashing the entire proceedings under Sections 376, 363, 366, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, as well as the impugned charge sheet, submitted against the applicant no.1 under Sections 376, 363, 366, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act and the applicant nos.2 and 3 under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. by the Investigating Officer in the aforesaid case crime in the light of compromise took place between the parties.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that a false first information report was lodged against the accused/ applicants, who are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. His further submission is that in fact, the first information report was lodged at the behest of opposite party no.2 only because of the fact that the present applicant no.1 was acquainted with the opposite party no.2, victim. His next submission was that the victim, in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., has supported the prosecution case. However, during the pendency of the aforesaid criminal case, the applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled their dispute amicably.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned Counsel for the Respondent vehemently opposed the prayer by submitting that Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 has been enacted by the Legislature for the prevention and protection of children as defined in the said Act. He also submitted that the victim was a child on the date of occurrence. Therefore, no compromise between such victims and the accused/ applicants is permissible in law. Therefore, the present application is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed
Observations of the Court:
This Court referred to the case of Satish Kumar Jatav vs. State of U.P., 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 488 in which it was held that the ground of "no useful purpose will be served by prolonging the proceedings of the case" cannot be a good ground and/or a ground at all to quash the criminal proceedings when a clear case was made out for the offence alleged.
So far as the question of quashing of criminal proceedings is concerned, this Court referred to the case of Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, which specifically held that the matter under Section 376 I.P.C. is also such an offence, which, though committed in respect of a particular victim, cannot be termed to be a private dispute between the parties. It has a serious adverse societal effect. Therefore, any proceeding on the basis of the alleged compromise of the accused vis-a-vis the victim cannot be quashed.
The decision of the Court:
The Allahabad High Court dismissed the application seeking quashing of a case under Section 376 I.P.C. read with Sections 3/4 POCSO Act on the basis of a compromise entered between the present accused/ applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2.
Case Title: Pravin Kumar Singh @ Pravin Kumar And 2 Others vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. And Another
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava
Case no.: APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2941 of 2023
Advocate for the Applicant: Ajeet Kumar Yadav,Ashish Kumar Gupta
Advocate for the Defendant: G.A.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
