Bombay High Court Quashes FIR in Rape Case Due to Compromise and Marriage Between Parties — No Prima Facie Case Found as Couple Living Together.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 49
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Ravindra Laxman Ghogardare, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad seeking quashing of FIR No. I266/2018 registered at Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar, for offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 420 and 312 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR was lodged by respondent no.2, Sanjivani Ramdas Duche, alleging that the petitioner repeatedly raped her on the false promise of marriage and also caused her to miscarry. The parties, however, subsequently married and were living together as husband and wife. The petitioner contended that the allegations were false and that the couple had resolved their differences. The respondent no.2 appeared and stated that she had no objection to the quashing of the FIR. The State opposed the petition, arguing that the offences were serious and non-compoundable. The Court, after hearing the parties, observed that the parties had married and were living together, and that the respondent no.2 did not support the prosecution. The Court held that continuing the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law and that the ends of justice would be served by quashing the FIR. The Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR, relying on its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Inherent Powers - Section 482 CrPC - Compromise in Non-Compoundable Offences - The Court considered whether an FIR for rape, cheating, and causing miscarriage can be quashed based on compromise. The parties married and lived together; the Court held that continuing prosecution would be an abuse of process of law, and quashed the FIR to secure the ends of justice. (Paras 4-6)

B) Indian Penal Code - Rape - Section 376(2)(n) - Prima Facie Case - The FIR alleged repeated rape on false promise of marriage. However, the parties married and lived together; the Court found no prima facie case of rape as the relationship was consensual and the couple was living as husband and wife. (Paras 3-5)

C) Indian Penal Code - Cheating - Section 420 - Causing Miscarriage - Section 312 - The allegations of cheating and causing miscarriage were also considered. Since the parties married and the respondent no.2 did not support the prosecution, the Court held that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial. (Paras 4-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the FIR registered for offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 420 and 312 of the Indian Penal Code can be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties, especially when the parties have married and are living together.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. FIR No. I266/2018 registered with Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar for offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 420 and 312 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.

Law Points

  • Quashing of FIR
  • Compromise in non-compoundable offences
  • Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC
  • Prima facie case
  • Rape
  • Cheating
  • Causing miscarriage
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (BOM) (03) 2

Criminal Writ Petition No.1810 of 2018

2019-02-05

S.S.Shinde, R.G.Avachat

Mr.D.C.Awari for Petitioner, Mr.S.B.Joshi APP for Respondent/State, Mr.R.C.Bora holding for Mr.R.P.Bidwe for Respondent No.2

Ravindra Laxman Ghogardare

State of Maharashtra, Miss Sanjivani Ramdas Duche

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal Writ Petition for quashing of FIR

Remedy Sought

Quashing of FIR No. I266/2018 registered with Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar for offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 420 and 312 of IPC

Filing Reason

Allegations of rape, cheating and causing miscarriage; parties subsequently married and living together

Issues

Whether the FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties? Whether continuing prosecution would be an abuse of process of law?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the allegations are false and the parties have married and are living together. Respondent no.2 stated she has no objection to quashing of FIR. State opposed, contending that the offences are serious and non-compoundable.

Ratio Decidendi

When the parties have married and are living together, and the complainant does not support the prosecution, continuing criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. The inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC can be invoked to quash the FIR to secure the ends of justice.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard. This Petition is filed praying therein to quash and set aside the FIR vide Crime No. I266/2018, registered with Kotwali Police Station, Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 376 (2) (n), 420 and 312 of the Indian Penal Code. In brief, it is alleged in the FIR by respondent no.2 that, the petitioner repeatedly committed rape on her on the false promise of marriage and also caused her to miscarry. The petitioner and respondent no.2 have married and are living together. The respondent no.2 states that she has no objection to quashing of the FIR. In the light of the above, we are of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial. The continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the FIR deserves to be quashed.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No.1810 of 2018 before the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad seeking quashing of FIR. The petition was heard on 31.01.2019 and judgment pronounced on 05.02.2019.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 376(2)(n), 420, 312
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 482
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Contemnor in Criminal Contempt Case — Remorse and Apology Accepted. Court holds that genuine remorse and unconditional apology can purge contempt, and mercy must remain integral to judicial conscience under Contempt o...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Murder Based on Circumstantial Evidence and Motive of Illicit Relationship. Accused convicted under Section 302 IPC for murdering victim with spade after being caught in compromising position with victim's wif...