The Allahabad High Court has expounded that the victims do not have the freedom to compromise prosecution in heinous offences such as rape and molestation of minors, which are punishable under the Act of 2012.
“The State is the forerunner of the prosecution and it is the State who have to pursue the prosecution to its logical conclusion. The endeavour of the Court in a matter involving such a heinous offence is to determine the truth of the allegations. The purpose is not to persecute the accused nor is it to let him off, because his relations with the complainant has taken a happier turn.”
The above observation has been made by the single bench of Justice J.J. Munir while dealing with an application under section 482 of CrPC filed by one, Om Prakash, for quashing of proceedings of a Case under Sections 376(1), 323, 357-ka, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 pending before the Special Judge (POCSO Act) Jhansi.
The brief facts of the present case are that the second opposite party had filed a complainant against the applicant stating that the applicant, deceitfully promising to marry her, had carnal relations with her and also molested her daughter with questionable intentions. Thereafter, the applicant had beat up the complainant and the applicant ravished the complainant. On the basis of the said FIR, the present crime has been registered, including offences of rape and those under the Act of 2012.
The Counsel for the applicant has pointed out before the court that the applicant and the second opposite party have married according to Hindu rites on 15.08.2021 and are living together as man and wife and the complainant-opposite party has filed an application before the Special Judge that in view of parties' marriage, she does not want to pursue the prosecution, which should be disposed of on the basis of a compromise.
It has been submitted by the Counsel for the applicant that no useful purpose would be served in carrying on the prosecution, which would be an abuse of process of Court.
The Court while rejecting the application has observed that prosecution in heinous offences such as rape and molestation of minors, which are punishable under the Act of 2012, the victims do not have the freedom to compromise as if it were a compoundable offence or a civil cause.
The court has further stated that an offence of rape or one under Section 7/8 of the Act of 2012 is an offence against the society, the truth of which has to be established before a Court of competent jurisdiction on the basis of whatever evidence is led at the trial. The accused may be acquitted if the charge is not proved, or if proved, he would be convicted. Short of that, the accused can say that he is entitled to be discharged. Of course, he will have that right, wherever the law permits and at whatever stage. In any eventuality, in a matter like the present one, this Court cannot interdict the prosecution and quash proceedings for the saying of the complainant, based on compromise between parties.
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure .
0 Comments