Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

High Court of Delhi Refused To Quash FIR In Rape Case On the Basis of Marriage with Victim And Compromise

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 05 July 2023, the High Court of Delhi has dismissed a petition seeking the quashing of an FIR in a criminal case. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, emphasizes the importance of allowing the trial proceedings to continue and highlights the need to determine the validity of the marriage and the applicability of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) during the trial.

The petitioner, Mohd. Amaan Malik, had filed the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking the quashing of FIR No. 162/2021 registered at a Delhi Police Station. The FIR charged the petitioner with offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the POCSO Act.

In the judgment, the court stated, "Since the petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him, it is pertinent to refer to the principles that govern quashing of FIRs." The court highlighted that the power to quash an FIR should be exercised to prevent abuse of the court's process or to secure the ends of justice, as per the principles laid down by the Supreme Court.

The court further observed that, at the present stage, there were no sufficient grounds to quash the FIR. It took note of the fact that the case was pending before the trial court and that the victim had supported the prosecution's case in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court also acknowledged the allegation of forcible physical relations made by the victim, which was mentioned in her statement and the FIR.

Regarding the validity of the marriage and the applicability of the POCSO Act, the court held that these issues could be appropriately addressed during the trial proceedings. It rejected the petitioner's argument that the marriage was valid under Muslim personal laws, stating that the age of the victim and the validity of the marriage would be considered during the trial.

The court concluded by dismissing the plea for quashing the FIR and emphasized the importance of allowing the trial to proceed. The judgment serves as a reminder that the veracity of the allegations and the application of relevant laws should be determined through a thorough examination of evidence during the trial.

Date of Decision: 5th July 2023                                      

MOHD. AMAAN MALIK   vs THE STATE GOVT NCT OF DELHI & ANR.   

Latest Legal News