Delhi High Court
Sidharth Priya vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. on 18 August, 2015
Author: S. P. Garg
$-4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DECIDED ON : 18th AUGUST, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 632/2015
SIDHARTH PRIYA ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.Shekhar Kumar, Advocate with
Mr.Janme Jay, Advocate.
versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP.
Mr.Nawalendra Kumar, Advocate
for R2.
SI Pinki Rana.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.Garg, J. (Oral)
1. The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed
by the petitioner for quashing of the FIR No.1314/2014 registered under
Section 376 IPC at PS New Ashok Nagar. Status report is on record.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have
examined the file. Status report reveals that on the complaint of the
prosecutrix 'X' (assumed name) on 02.11.2014 the FIR was lodged. In her
statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix reiterated her
allegations. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet has been
filed for committing offence under Section 376 IPC against the petitioner
where the next date of hearing is 23.08.2015.
3. It appears that the matter has been settled and the prosecutrix
has opted not to pursue the matter. However, that aspect itself is not
sufficient at this stage to quash the FIR under Section 376 IPC. Offence
under Section 376 IPC is not compoundable. In 'Gian Singh vs. State of
Punjab & anr.', 2012 (10) SCC 303, the Supreme Court categorically
excluded settlement to have any legal sanction in such serious offences
like murder, rape and dacoity, etc. In a recent judgment 'State of M.P. vs.
Madanlal', 2015 (7) SCALE 261, decided on 01.07.2015, Supreme Court
observed :
"The aforesaid view was expressed while dealing
with the imposition of sentence. We would like to
clearly state that in a case of rape or attempt of
rape, the conception of compromise under no
circumstances can really be thought of. These are
crimes against the body of a woman which is her
own temple. These are offences which suffocate
the breath of life and sully the reputation. And
reputation, needless to emphasise, is the richest
jewel one can conceive of in life. No one would
allow it to be extinguished. When a human frame
is defiled, the "purest treasure", is lost. Dignity of
a woman is a part of her non-perishable and
immortal self and no one should ever think of
painting it in clay. There cannot be a compromise
or settlement as it would be against her honour
which matters the most. It is sacrosanct.
Sometimes solace is given that the perpetrator of
the crime has acceded to enter into wedlock with
her which is nothing but putting pressure in an
adroit manner; and we say with emphasis that the
Courts are to remain absolutely away from this
subterfuge to adopt a soft approach to the case,
for any kind of liberal approach has to be put in
the compartment of spectacular error. Or to put it
differently, it would be in the realm of a sanctuary
of error. We are compelled to say so as such an
attitude reflects lack of sensibility towards the
dignity, the elan vital, of a woman. Any kind of
liberal approach or thought of mediation in this
regard is thoroughly and completely sans legal
permissibility...."
4. In view of the above, I find no merit in the instant petition
and is dismissed.
(S.P.GARG)
JUDGE
AUGUST 18, 2015 / tr
