Sanjay Son Of Shri Ramchandra vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 1722 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

        S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.743/2023

1.     Sanjay Son Of Shri Ramchandra, Aged About 23 Years,
       Resident Of Shaktshura, Tehsil Shahpura, Police Station
       Manoharpura, District Jaipur (Raj).
2.     Vikram @ Chhotu Son Of Shri Sharwan Kumar, Aged
       About 21 Years, Resident Of Shaktshura, Tehsil Shahpura,
       Police Station Manoharpura, District Jaipur (Raj).
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
2.     Victim D/o Shri Pappu Ram Yogi W/o Shri Sanjay Kumar
       Yogi, Aged about 18 years, R/o Ward No.13, Jogiyo Ka
       Mohalla, Shakatpura, Tehsil Shahpura, Police Station
       Manoharpura, District Jaipur (Raj.)
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shyam Bihari Gautam, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deshraj Gosingha, PP Mr. Vijay Singh, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Order

07/02/2023

This petition is for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding

of FIR No.053/2021 registered with Police Station Manoharpur,

District Jaipur Rural (Raj.) for the offences under Sections 376(D),

341 and 323 of IPC and Sections 5(G) and 6 of Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act.

The prayer is on the ground that after the victim attained the

majority, she has already married with the petitioner-Sanjay.

In the circumstances, continuance of criminal proceedings

would be an abuse of the process of law.

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-743/2023]

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Annexure-4

would reveal that both have married on 06.05.2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied on the

judgment of The Hon'ble Supreme Court in K Dhandapani Vs.

The State by the Inspector of Police, Criminal Appeal

No.796/2022, decided on 09.05.2022. In Dhandapani case

(supra), the allegation was of physical relations with the

prosecutrix, a minor girl on the promise of marrying her. Later on,

the accused and the prosecutrix had married and they had two

children from the wedlock. The Hon'ble Supreme Court asked the

District Judge to record the statement of the prosecutrix about her

present status. The statement of the prosecutrix was produced

before The Hon'ble Supreme Court in which she had categorically

stated that the appellant was taking care of her two children and

was leading a happy conjugal life.

In the aforesaid circumstances, the criminal prosecution was

quashed and the conviction of the appellant was set aside.

In the case on hand, the statement of the victim has already

been recorded as PW.1 during course of trial on 20.09.2021. In

that statement, the victim had categorically supported a case of

gang rape. There is nothing on the record to substantiate that she

ever resile from her statement before the trial Judge.

Now the question posed is whether the act of sexual assault

committed against a minor and its social impact and ramification

at the time of incident would get minimized or vanished if the

offender chooses to marry with the victim and victim agrees for

that.

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-743/2023]

In Aparna Bhat & Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh &

Anr., reported in AIR 2021 SC 1492, the identical issue was

considered by The Hon'ble Supreme Court and sleuth of directions

were issued. In Para-44(e), the Court said;

"The courts while adjudicating cases involving gender related crimes, should not suggest or entertain any notions (or encourage any steps) towards compromises between the prosecutrix and the accused to get married, suggest or mandate mediation between the accused and the survivor, or any form of compromise as it is beyond their powers and jurisdiction."

Evidently, The Hon'ble Supreme Court has cautioned from

encouraging any step towards compromise between the

prosecutrix and the accused to get married. If this Court accepts

the compromise it would amount to encouraging the offenders to

settle the dispute by hooks and crocks with the victim. Therefore,

grant of permission would lead to miscarriage of justice.

Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed as devoid of any

merit.

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J

Ashwani/-36

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)