The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stated that a rape case cannot be dismissed solely based on a compromise between the accused and the complainant, as the offence under SECTION 376(2)(N) and 506 of the IPC is a grave crime and is non-compoundable under SECTION 320 OF CRPC. However, JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI acknowledged the importance of protecting the married life of the accused and complainant and ensuring justice for them. Therefore, the compromise made between the couple cannot be disregarded in order to ensure fairness and safeguard their future together.
The verdict was issued by the bench in response to a petition requesting the dismissal of the FIR filed in February 2020, which charged the accused under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 of the IPC. The complainant in the case had previously obtained a divorce from her former husband before meeting the accused, who was later accused of raping her on multiple occasions when she was alone in her home.
The FIR alleged that a compromise had been reached between the two parties at one point, and they had planned to get married. However, the accused fled after locking his house, and the matter was reported to the police. The court reviewed the report of the JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE 1ST CLASS IN MALERKOTLA, which recorded the statements of both the accused and the complainant.
The court concluded that the compromise had been reached without any coercion, undue influence, or pressure on either party.
According to the court, the circumstances of the case suggest that the complainant had previously divorced her first husband before entering into a relationship with the accused petitioner. The two had even planned to get married on FEBRUARY 27, 2020. However, the accused and his family fled to avoid the marriage. Subsequently, the matter was resolved, and the two parties were able to reconcile their differences and marry on February 28, 2020.
The court stated that the petitioner and the complainant are now contentedly married and have successfully resolved all of their disagreements.
The bench cited the Supreme Court’s decision in JATIN AGGARWAL V. STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR, in which the court utilized ARTICLE 142 to dismiss a rape FIR in a comparable case. Additionally, the bench referred to a previous ruling from a coordinate bench of the high court.
As a result, the court concluded that continuing with Criminal Proceedings would serve no purpose, particularly given that the parties have resolved all their disputes and are presently living happily. Consequently, the court dismissed the FIR and any related proceedings.
Written by Vaishnavi Goel (BA.LLB), 6TH Semester, Punjab School of Law, Punjabi University, Patiala
