Court can quash cases of non compoundable offences under exceptional circumstances; High Court of Delhi
There are always exceptions to the normal rules and certain categories of cases, which deserve consideration especially when it is a case of a love affair between teenagers and due to fear of the society and pressure from the community one party alleges rape, cases, where the accused and the victim are well known to each other and allegation of rape, is leveled only because the accused refused to marry, and such cases can be quashed. This was held in the case of Ashish v State and Anr, [CRL.M.C. 389/2021 & Crl.M.A. 2060/2021] by Hon’ble Justice Suresh Kumar Kait in the High Court of Delhi.
Petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR, under Sections 376/506 IPC, registered at police station Shakarpur, Delhi. Petitioner submitted that the misunderstanding between petitioner and prosecutrix has been resolved in terms of a Compromise Deed. He also submitted that the marriage between petitioner and prosecutrix has been solemnized in Arya Samaj Mandir, Nakul Gali, Vishwas Nagar, Delhi on 25.09.2020 itself and they are happily living together as husband and wife. He next submits that the prosecutrix does not wish to pursue the proceedings arising out of FIR in question and her affidavit dated 06.02.2021 to this effect was placed on record.
Petitioners placed reliance on the case of Sikandar Kumar Vs. State of U.T., Chandigarh, CRM-M No.47266 of 2019, In normal circumstances, the Court would not entertain a matter when the non-compoundable offenses are heinous in nature and against the public. In the instant case, the offense, complained of is under Section 376 IPC, which is an offense of grave nature. In the eyes of law, the offense of rape is serious and non-compoundable and the Courts should not in ordinary circumstances interfere and quash the FIR that has been registered. But in cases where the accused and the victim are well known to each other and allegation of rape is leveled only because the accused refused to marry, as well as the age, educational maturity, and mental capacity, consequences of the same ought to be kept in mind when inclined to interfere.” Court also placed reliance on the case of Parbat Bhai Aahir and Ors. vs. State of Gujrat & Ors. (AIR 2017 SC 4843) where it was held that he FIR should not be quashed in case of rape as it is a heinous offence, but when complainant/prosecutrix herself takes the initiative and states that she made the complaint due to some misunderstanding and now wants to give quietus to the misunderstanding which arose between her and the petitioner, the quashing should be allowed.
The Court ordered to quash the present FIR and opinioned that no useful purpose would be served in prosecuting the petitioner any further.