Delhi High court refused to quash the FIR in a case where the accused concealed his identity to ‘sexually exploit’ the victim even after the victim pardoned the accused and decided to lead a matrimonial life with him. The court remarked “In crimes which seriously endangers the well being of the society, it is not safe to leave the crime doer only because he and the victim have settled the dispute amicably.”
Facts
The victim was promised marriage by the accused and the accused concealed his true identity from the victim and sexually exploited her after which the victim filed the complaint at the police station in Prem Nagar. The status report of police investigation further revealed that the accused exploited the victim for five years and also forged a fake Aadhaar card and his marriage certificate with the victim was also found to be a fake one. However, the victim and the accused decided to settle the dispute amicably and a petition was filed in the Delhi high court which sought quashment of the FIR under section 482 CrPC since the victim and the accused wished to lead a peaceful matrimonial life.
Petitioner’s Submission
The counsel for petitioner submitted that the respondent and the petitioner had decided to live as husband and wife and the complainant no longer wished to pursue the complaint. The counsel further pleaded the court to quash the complaint under section 482 of the CrPC since both of the parties decided to live together and there was no purpose to continue the complaint.
Court’s Decision
The single judge bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that the court had the power to quash proceedings in non-compoundable cases under section 482 of CrPC in cases where there was a settlement between the parties but the court further noted that such quashing was subjected to two guiding factors which are laid down by the Supreme Court which are that such quashing of proceedings-
- Would secure ends of justice
- Prevent abuse of process of any court.
The court observed that in the present case the offences were serious in nature and not a marital dispute which can be settled between the parties amicably and remarked “A reading of the allegations in the FIR and the Status Report, it is evident that the petitioner has been accused of serious offences like rape and forgery having a bearing on vital societal interest and these offences cannot be construed to be merely private or civil disputes but rather will have an effect on the society at large. In crimes which seriously endangers the well being of the society, it is not safe to leave the crime doer only because he and the victim have settled the dispute amicably”
For Recent Judgement/ Orders Visit Here
After making the aforementioned observations the court refused to quash the FIR and dismissed the petition.
0 Comments