The Power Under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 CPC is Drastic and Extraordinary; Should Not Be Exercised Mechanically or Merely for the Asking: Calcutta High Court Telangana High Court Strikes Down Section 10-A: Upholds Transparency in Public Employment Absence of Homogeneous Mixing and Procedural Deficiencies Vitiate NDPS Conviction: Punjab and Haryana High Court Business Disputes Cannot Be Given Criminal Color: Patna High Court Quashes Complaint in Trademark Agreement Case Gujarat High Court Appoints Wife as Guardian of Comatose Husband, Calls for Legislative Framework Standard of Proof in Professional Misconduct Requires 'Higher Threshold' but Below 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Delhi High Court Imprisonment Cannot Bar Education: Bombay HC Allows UAPA Accused to Pursue LL.B. High Court Acquits Accused in Double Murder Case, Asserts ‘Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof’ Long separation and irreparable breakdown of marriage must be read as cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Regulation 101 Applies to All Aided Institutions, Including Minority Ones, Says Allahabad High Court Fraud Unravels All Judicial Acts : Jharkhand High Court Orders Demolition of Unauthorized Constructions in Ratan Heights Case Calcutta High Court Allows Amendment of Pleadings Post-Trial: Necessary for Determining Real Questions in Controversy Exaggerated Allegations in Matrimonial Disputes Cause Irreparable Suffering, Even Acquittal Can't Erase Scars: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Relatives in Matrimonial Dispute Consent Requires Active Deliberation; False Promise of Marriage Must Be Proximate Cause for Sexual Relations: Supreme Court Urgency Clause in Land Acquisition for Yamuna Expressway Upheld: Supreme Court Affirms Public Interest in Integrated Development Interest Rate of 24% Compounded Annually Held Excessive; Adjusted to Ensure Fairness in Loan Transactions: AP HC Prosecution Under IPC After Factories Act Conviction Violates Article 20(2): Bombay High Court Join Our Exclusive Lawyer E News WhatsApp Group!

Exchanging Money for Quietus to Rape Proceedings Is Immoral and Strikes at Core of Justice System: Delhi High Court

03 November 2024 1:13 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to quash an FIR in a rape case, underscoring the gravity of the allegations and the impermissibility of settling such matters through monetary compensation. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, in her judgment, emphasized that allowing the quashing of an FIR based on a financial settlement would undermine the integrity of the criminal justice system.

The case involves petitioner Rakesh Yadav, who sought to quash an FIR registered against him at Mehrauli Police Station in Delhi for offences under Sections 376 (rape), 377, 323, 509, 34, and 380 of the IPC. The prosecutrix, a single mother, alleged that she met the petitioner on a social media platform where he misrepresented himself as a divorced man. She accused him of spiking her drink and sexually assaulting her multiple times under the false promise of marriage, and of subsequently blackmailing her with intimate photographs. The prosecutrix also alleged that the petitioner stole Rs. 2,20,000 from her and continuously threatened her and her child.

Justice Sharma noted the severity of the allegations, which included repeated incidents of sexual violence, deception, and threats. "The allegations made in the FIR reveal continuous incidents of extreme sexual violence and the fact that the accused had misrepresented himself as divorced and had engaged in sexual violence and a sexual relationship with her under the false pretext of marriage," the court observed .

The court extensively discussed the principles governing the quashing of FIRs, particularly in cases involving serious crimes like rape. Referencing the Supreme Court’s rulings in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal and Neeharika Infrastructure v. State of Maharashtra, Justice Sharma emphasized that criminal proceedings involving grave offences should not be quashed merely based on a compromise between the parties .

"The offence under Section 376 is a serious crime against society at large," the court stated, underscoring that such cases require thorough investigation and trial to uphold justice .

In a significant observation, Justice Sharma stated, "Money, it seems, is to be exchanged for getting a quietus to the present criminal proceedings for offence of rape—a proposition that is not only immoral but also strikes at the very core of our criminal justice system" . She further noted, "To allow a settlement, such as the present one, to crystallize would amount to trivializing the sufferings of a rape victim, and reducing her anguish to a mere transaction" .
The Delhi High Court’s dismissal of the petition to quash the FIR reinforces the judiciary's commitment to addressing sexual violence with the seriousness it warrants. By rejecting the compromise based on monetary settlement, the judgment sends a clear message that justice in cases of sexual violence is not negotiable and must be pursued through the proper legal channels. This decision is expected to have significant implications for the handling of similar cases in the future, ensuring that the integrity of the judicial process is maintained.

Date of Decision: July 1, 2024
Rakesh Yadav & Ors. vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Similar News