New Delhi, Sep 24 (IANS) The Delhi High Court has refused to quash a rape and POCSO case against a 49-year-old man on the basis of a compromise with the child victim, observing that such offences are heinous and have a serious impact on society.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Sachin Datta dismissed a petition filed by Anand Singh Rawat seeking quashing of a 2022 FIR registered at Fatehpur Beri Police Station under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, along with the proceedings arising therefrom.
The petitioner had sought quashing of the case on the basis of a compromise stated to have been arrived at with the victim with the intervention of her family.
The High Court observed that the trial was already at the stage of prosecution evidence and that the case involved allegations of aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon a child by a person in a position of trust or authority.
“These are heinous offences which have a serious impact on society,” Justice Datta observed in an order passed on September 22.
The High Court relied on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, wherein the apex court had recognised the High Court’s inherent power to quash criminal proceedings in appropriate cases but clarified that such power could not ordinarily be exercised in respect of heinous and serious offences, including rape.
“The power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code,” the Supreme Court had held in the Gian Singh judgment. It had further observed that “heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute”.
The Delhi High Court said that the Supreme Court had specifically held that such offences were not private in nature and had a serious impact on society.
“Resultantly, the child victim or their family cannot compromise an offence under the POCSO Act,” Justice Datta said.
Dismissing the petition, the High Court held that quashing the proceedings at this stage on the basis of the compromise “would defeat not only the object of the statute but also the ends of justice”. However, the High Court clarified that its order should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, which would be decided by the trial court on the basis of evidence.
–IANS
pds/vd