Delhi High Court
Yakub & Ors. vs The State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) & ... on 10 April, 2015
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: April 10, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 1032/2015
YAKUB & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Prabhat Kumar and Mr.
Akhilesh Padhan, Advocates
versus
THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS
..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent-State
with SI Priyanka
Respondents No.2 & 3 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.2575/2014 registered under Section 376 of
IPC registered at P.S. Mehrauli, New Delhi is sought on the basis of
affidavits of respondents No.2 & 3 and Compromise Deed of 16th
February, 2015 (Annexure P-3).
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits
that besides the offence under Section 376 of IPC, offence under The
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 has been also
committed and in view of the gravity of the offence committed, this
CRL.M.C. 1032/2015 Page 1
petition is strongly opposed. It is submitted that in serious cases, like the
instant one, FIRs ought not to be quashed. In this regard, attention of this
Court is drawn to the following observations made by the Apex Court in
„Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.‟ (2012) 10 SCC 303, which reads
as under:-
"58. In respect of serious offences like murder, rape,
dacoity, etc., or other offences of mental depravity under
IPC or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes,
like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences
committed by public servants while working in that capacity,
the settlement between the offender and the victim can have
no legal sanction at all."
It is pointed out that the afore-noted dictum of the Apex Court
stands reiterated by the Apex Court in its later decision in Narinder Singh
v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466. The pertinent observations of the
Apex Court in Narinder Singh (Supra) are as under:-
"29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those
prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of
mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.
Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious
impact on society. Similarly, for the offences alleged to have
been committed under special statute like the Prevention of
Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants
while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely
on the basis of compromise between the victim and the
offender."
Upon hearing and on perusal of the FIR in question and the
decisions cited, I find that the nature of the offence committed is such
CRL.M.C. 1032/2015 Page 2
which dissuades this Court to quash the FIR in question.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed while clarifying that the
dismissal of this petition would not be taken as a reflection on the merits
of this case at trial.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
APRIL 10, 2015
s
CRL.M.C. 1032/2015 Page 3
