Allahabad HC refuses to quash Minor's rape case on basis of compromise between parties

The Allahabad High Court recently refused to quash a rape case on the basis that a compromise had taken place between the parties.

The bench of Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava held, "...quashing of a case under Section 376 I.P.C. read with Sections 3/4 POCSO Act on the basis of compromise entered between the present accused/ applicant no.1 and opposite party no.2, the victim, is not legally permissible".

Therefore, court dismissed an application moved under Section 482 CrPC filed to quash the said case.

The present application had been filed by three accused persons for quashing the entire proceedings in a 2014 case pending in the Court of Special Judge, POCSO Act, Lucknow under Sections 376, 363, 366, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act in the light of compromise that had taken place between the parties.

The counsel for the applicants submitted that they were innocent and had been falsely implicated in this case by the victim only because applicant no.1 was acquainted with the victim.

The victim, in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC supported the prosecution case, however, during the pendency of the case, the applicants and victim have settled their dispute amicably, the counsel contended.

Moreover, the counsel apprised the court that the victim and applicant no. 1 were now married and living happily together as husband and wife.

The present application was supported by the counsel for the victim, whereas, the Additional Government Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the same.

"Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 has been enacted by the Legislature for prevention and protection of children as defined in the said Act...the victim was a child on the date of occurrence. Therefore, no compromise between such victim and the accused/ applicants is permissible in law. Therefore, the present application is misconceived, which is liable to be dismissed", AGA argued.

Relying on a catena of judgments of the Apex Court, court observed that "the power of quashing of criminal proceedings should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in rarest of the rare cases and it was not justified for the Court in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the inherent powers do not confer any arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whims and fancies".

Court also referred to a recent judgment passed by a co-ordinate bench of the high court in Om Prakash vs. State of U.P. and another wherein it was held that the criminal proceedings under Section 376 I.P.C. and POCSO Act cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise entered into between the accused and the victim.

In view of the same, court held that the present application lacked merit and was liable to be dismissed.

Case Title: Pravin Kumar Singh @ Pravin Kumar And 2 Others v. State of UP