Recently, the Madhya Pradesh High Court addressed a petition filed under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash an FIR and charges under Section 376, 506, 376(2)(n), and 201 of the IPC, currently pending before the District and Sessions Judge, Indore.
High Court Bench emphasised that such serious offences, particularly rape, cannot be quashed based on compromise, as they are crimes against society. The Court rejected the petition, underscoring the gravity and societal impact of the allegations.
According to the prosecution, the complainant accused the petitioner of physical exploitation and breach of trust by falsely promising marriage. The two met in February 2022 at Mithya Club, Indore, and subsequently entered into a relationship. The petitioner allegedly visited the complainant’s house frequently and took her to hotels and other places, including Goa, Mumbai and Pachmarhi, where physical relations were established under the pretext of marriage. The complainant claimed to have given the petitioner financial assistance of approximately Rs. 70,000 to Rs.1 Lakh. Over time, the complainant grew suspicious that the petitioner was involved with other women, leading to altercations between the two. The petitioner allegedly assaulted the complainant and threatened her with the release of objectionable photos and videos if she refused to maintain physical relations. On 16/03/2024, under the threat of making these images viral, the petitioner allegedly forced the complainant into a physical relationship.
The counsel for the petitioner argued that the case is one of mutual consent and that the prosecutrix, being a major, was willing to engage in the relationship. It was also submitted that both parties have amicably settled their dispute and no longer wish to pursue the matter. The petitioner relied on various judgments, including Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr. and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, which allow quashing of proceedings based on a compromise. However, the counsel for the respondent opposed the quashing, contending that the charges under Section 376 IPC are heinous and non-compoundable.
The Court noted that under Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, heinous offences such as rape cannot be quashed merely based on a settlement, as they are crimes against society and have a serious impact. The court referenced several judgements, including Narinder Singh and State of M.P v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., which emphasized that while the court has the power to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, it must exercise this power cautiously, especially in cases involving serious offences like rape. Crimes of this nature are not considered private disputes but are against society’s moral and ethical fabric. Thus, based on the gravity of the allegations and the legal principles laid down, the court rejected the petition for quashing the FIR and charges.
Title: ROHAN NAIK AND ORS. v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Citation: MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 33594 of 2024
Coram: Justice Prem Narayan Singh
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Savita Rathore
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Chandra Bhusan Pandey
Read Order @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
