Himachal Pradesh High Court Lays Down Principles for Quashing Criminal Proceedings in Non-Compoundable Sexual Offences Based on Compromise

The Himachal Pradesh High Court quashed FIR and criminal proceedings related to a rape case, considering the bitterness that led to the filing of the FIR and the subsequent marriage between the accused and the victim, who were in a live-in relationship. The court, led by Justice Ranjan Sharma, elucidated principles for handling pleas seeking to quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable sexual offences based on compromise.

Key Points:

• The petitioner sought the quashing of offences under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, citing a live-in relationship with the victim, marriage prior to the FIR registration, and an amicable settlement facilitated by family intervention.
• Both the complainant and the victim sought to set aside the FIR and criminal proceedings to prevent bitterness and enmity.
• The court acknowledged the peculiar facts of the case and invoked its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC to secure the ends of justice.
• It referred to Supreme Court precedents and laid down principles, emphasizing that the power to quash under Section 482 extends to non-compoundable offences and should be exercised judiciously.
• Serious offences like rape and murder cannot be quashed solely based on settlement, while offences of a civil nature may warrant quashing.
• The court stressed that the decision to quash criminal proceedings should consider the well-being of the victim and the possibility of conviction.
• In this case, continuing proceedings would serve no purpose and may harm the parties involved, leading to bitterness and societal repercussions.
• Therefore, the court allowed the appeal, setting aside the FIR and criminal proceedings to prevent further harm to the victim and her family.

Case Details:

• Case Title: X vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
• Case No.: Cr.MMO No.171 of 2024
• Citation: 2024 Latest Caselaw 1 HP
• Coram: Justice Ranjan Sharma
• Advocates for the Petitioner: Mr. Manoj Pathak and Mr. Harsh Shroal
• Advocates for the Respondent: Mr. Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General

 If you like this law news, share it with a friend!