Read Time: 12 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on November 7, 2024, stressed on recognising the right of a third party to file a criminal appeal in cases where an apparent miscarriage of justice has occurred, yet neither the State, the victim, nor any relative has approached the court.

A bench of Justices C T Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar set aside the Rajasthan High Court's judgment of February 4, 2022 which quashed a sexual assault case based on a compromise between the accused-a teacher, and the father of the victim, who was sexually harassed at her school.

The court allowed an appeal filed by ordinary men from same tehsil of the victim, saying when an incident of this nature and gravity allegedly occurred in a higher secondary school, that too from a teacher, it cannot be simply described as an offence which is purely private in nature and has no serious impact on the society.

The bench turned down objections by the accused and the victim's father to the appeal, saying if a public-spirited person is non-suited on the ground of locus standi it would only help the offender to escape even without facing the trial. 

"Such situations may result in recurrence of commission of such offences detrimental to the interests of the society," the bench said.

The court had on December 2, 2022 ordered to convert the writ petition filed in the case under Article 32 of the Constitution into a special leave petition against the High Court's order, though the counsel for the accused and the victim's father vehemently challenged the locus standi of the appellants.

"It is disheartening to note that with tooth and nail, the counsel appearing for the fourth respondent, the father of the victim, challenged the appellants’ locus standi," the bench said.

The court also said a private party could prefer an appeal against acquittal invoking the jurisdiction of the top court under Article 136 of the Constitution if the judgment of acquittal led to serious miscarriage of justice. 

"According to us, such right to a third party to prefer a petition under Article 136 of the Constitution is certainly to be recognised and respected in a case where seemingly miscarriage of justice had occurred and still, neither State nor the victim or any relative falling under the term ‘victim’ approached this court," the bench said.

The court also noted the present case was not an appeal against acquittal but for quashing of the investigation based on compromise, despite the opposition from the public prosecutor and the State's failure to challenge the High Court's order.

It also found that it was no case that the petition was filed due to any private revenge or personal vendetta or ill motive.

In the case, the bench also emphasised that the power under Section 482 CrPC can't be used to quash the proceedings based on compromise if it is in respect of heinous offence which are not in private in nature and have a serious impact on the society.

"We have no hesitation to hold that in cases of this nature, the fact that in view of compromise entered into between the parties, the chance of a conviction is remote and bleak also cannot be a ground to abruptly terminate the investigation, by quashing FIR and all further proceedings pursuant thereto, by invoking the power under Section 482, CrPC in the said circumstances," the bench said.

An FIR was filed on January 8, 2022 with Sardar Gangapur City Police Station, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan at the instance of the father of the victim under Sections 354A, 342, 509 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3( 1)(b) & 3(2) (vii) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. However, the compromise was entered immediately on January 31, 2022. 

The bench noted that, despite the circumstances, the High Court did not examine whether the compromise reached between the parents and the accused should be upheld, especially given the serious allegations against the accused and the importance of ensuring justice.

"We are at a loss to understand how the High Court arrived at the conclusion that in the case on hand a dispute to be resolved exists between the parties and further that to maintain harmony the FIR and all further proceedings thereto should be quashed even without adverting to the allegations raised against the accused in the FIR," the bench said.

Referring to the objects and reasons for the enactment of the POCSO Act, the bench said it would undoubtedly show that quashment of proceedings initiated under this law abruptly by invoking the power under Section 482, Cr PC without permitting it to mature into a trial, except on extremely compelling reasons ex facie malafidely initiated or initiated solely to settle the score etc, would go against the very intention of the legislature behind the enactment.

In the case on hand, the court said, the victim was then a student of Class 11th in the Higher Secondary aged 16 years.

"When an incident of the nature and gravity allegedly occurred in a higher secondary school, that too from a teacher, it cannot be simply described as an offence which is purely private in nature and have no serious impact on the society," the bench said.

In the judgment, the bench quoted the renowned American poet H W Longfellow, who penned to the effect that a torn jacket might soon be mended, but a bruised heart of a child would be beyond reviviscence. 

“Certainly, it contains the gospel truth as relates a child subjected to sexual assault, be it aggravated or penetrative; or any kind of sexual abuse or exploitation. It is more so, in the case of a female child as it may hound her and hack her family life,” the bench said.

Case Title: Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors