“..The concept of compromise with regard to the offences of rape, cannot be accepted, because on this holy land where the belief has been prevailing since ancient golden days that where women is worshipped or honoured, divinity blossoms there… No one should be allowed to ravish her and later on, only on the basis of compromise under specific circumstances, allowed to be acquitted…”Justice Prem Narayan Singh says
Indore (Madhya Pradesh): Indore bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected a petition by ex-corporator and Congress leader Anwar Dastak to quash an FIR holding that the concept of compromise noting that the offences of rape cannot be accepted in “this holy land” where women are worshipped and honoured.
An FIR in the case stated that the prosecutrix, who is a divorcee, had met Anwar Dastak in a school in 2019. Dastak had allegedly promised to help her in starting a saloon. On July 9, 2021, the accused allegedly reached her house and made physical relations without her consent.
The accused told her that he would solemnise marriage/nikah with her. However, later he denied marrying her and threatened her with dire consequences if she reported the matter to police. During the pendency of the case, both the parties settled their dispute amicably.
Since there was no dispute remaining between the parties, a petition under Section 482 of CrPC was filed before the High Court. Both the parties requested the court to quash the FIR by using extraordinary powers enshrined under Section 482 of CrPC
The State government’s advocate Rajesh Joshi controverted the contentions of the accused and argued that the offence under Section 376 of IPC was a non-compoundable offence and it cannot be permitted to be compromised by the Court using extraordinary powers as it is an office against public interest.
The court noted that heinous or serious crimes, which are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the offender and the complainant and/or the victim.
“Crimes like murder, rape, burglary, dacoity and even abetment to commit suicide are neither private nor civil in nature. Such crimes are against the society. In no circumstances can prosecution be quashed on compromise, when the offence is serious and grave and falls within the ambit of crime against society, the court observed.
Justice Prem Narayan Singh said, “A woman survives as a mother, wife, sister and daughter etc of every person. Her body is known as her own temple as she is specifically known for her sacrifices. No one should be allowed to ravish her and later on, only on the basis of compromise under specific circumstances, allowed to be acquitted, specially when the legislature itself in its wisdom declines to allow such type of compromise.”
The court held that by simply entering into compromise, charges of rape cannot be said to have been mitigated or quashed as the offence is against the dignity of a woman as well as public interest. Accordingly, the court rejected the petition.
