Quashing rape FIRs based on monetary settlements would mean justice is for sale: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently observed that cases related to allegations of sexual violence cannot be quashed based on monetary payments, because doing this would imply that justice is for sale [Rakesh Yadav & Ors v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr]..Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the first information report (FIR) in question highlights issues of self-respect, life and death for the prosecutrix and her child, and contains her assertions that she possesses evidence of the threats and other allegations.“…this Court is of the opinion that criminal cases involving allegations of sexual violence cannot be quashed on the basis of monetary payments, as doing so would imply that justice is for sale,” the Court said..The High Court made the observation while refusing to quash an FIR registered under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was alleged that the woman in question was sexually assaulted by a man four times. The accused and the victim had met on social media.It also noted that the accused had misrepresented himself as being divorced and had engaged in sexual violence with the woman under the false pretext of marriage.Later, the two settled and agreed to quash the case on payment of ₹12 lakh. Considering the financial condition of the accused, the amount finally agreed was ₹1.5 lakh..The Court considered the case and said that an FIR in a serious case like this cannot be quashed.“This Court is of the opinion that justice in a criminal trial, particularly in a case such as the present one, serves not only as a serious example and deterrent to the accused but also as a lesson to the community as a whole. Neither the accused nor the complainant can be allowed to manipulate the criminal justice system or misuse State and judicial resources to serve their own ends. Therefore, even if the parties have reached a compromise, they cannot demand the quashing of an FIR as a matter of right.”Justice Sharma added that the trial court must decide the case on its merits, and examine the facts in light of natural justice for both the complainant and the accused, keeping in mind the broader implications for the community and the criminal justice system..Advocate Shashak Jain appeared for the accused.Additional Public Prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar with Advocates Jasir Aftab and Md Hedayatullah represented the State..[Read Judgment]