Swatantra Kumar Jaysawal vs. State & Anr.

Facts

The petitioner, Swatantra Kumar Jaysawal, filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking to quash FIR No. 219/2021 registered at PS Patparganj Industrial Area for offences under Sections 376/323/506 IPC. The FIR was registered based on a complaint by the respondent no. 2, who alleged sexual assault, molestation, and threats by the petitioner. The complainant met the petitioner through Jeevansathi.com, and after a period of communication and meetings, she alleged multiple incidents of rape and molestation between December 2020 and June 2021. The petitioner is a Government Servant working as Superintendent with the Customs & CGST department. The parties later reported to the court that they had amicably settled their disputes and had married each other.

Held

The Court held that criminal proceedings emanating from FIR No. 219/2021, which involves allegations of rape, cannot be quashed in exercise of powers vested under Section 482 Cr.P.C. solely on the basis of a settlement between the complainant and the petitioner, even if they have subsequently married. The Court relied on several Supreme Court judgments, including Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr., State of M.P. v. Madanlal, State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., and Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr. These judgments consistently hold that offences like rape are heinous and serious, not private in nature, and have a significant impact on society. The Court reiterated that the conception of compromise in cases of rape cannot be entertained as it is an offence against the body of a woman and her dignity. The fact that the parties have compromised and married does not mitigate the gravity of the alleged offence or waive it off. The statement of the respondent no. 2 recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. corroborated the allegations in the FIR. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court, in its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can quash criminal proceedings for the offence of rape (Section 376 IPC) when the parties have entered into a compromise and subsequently married? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner, through his counsel and in person, argued that the parties have amicably settled all disputes, and no grievance remains. He emphasized that he is a government servant whose career is at stake and that continuing the case would jeopardize his life. Counsel for respondent no. 2 supported this, stating that since the parties have compromised, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the case. Revenue/State's Argument: The learned ASC for the State argued that the allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious. While acknowledging the settlement, the ASC contended that an offence under Section 376 IPC is a serious societal offence and the offender cannot be let off in the garb of an amicable settlement. The FIR should not be quashed solely on the basis of the settlement.