The apex court made the observation while setting aside the Rajasthan High Court’s decision to quash a POCSO case against a school teacher following a compromise reached between him and the father of the minor victim.
The Supreme Court Thursday said a sexual harassment case cannot be closed after a compromise is reached between the rival parties as such offences have serious impact on the society.
The apex court made the observation while setting aside the Rajasthan High Court’s decision to quash a POCSO case against a school teacher following a compromise reached between him and the father of the minor victim.
The HC had quashed the case exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC “to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.”
A bench of Justices C T Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar referred to the SC’s 2012 decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, which it said had laid down in unambiguous terms…that “before exercising the power under Section 482, CrPC, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime” and held that “heinous and serious offences could not be quashed even though a victim or victim’s family and the offender had settled the dispute”.
Justice Ravikumar said “this court held that such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on the society”, and that “it is the bounden duty of the court concerned to consider whether the compromise is just and fair besides being free from undue pressure we will proceed to consider the matter further”.
It said that a bare perusal of the February 4, 2022 HC order “would reveal that the High Court has erred in not bestowing proper consideration the law… The impugned order would reveal that the allegations contained in the subject FIR was not at all even adverted to, before quashing the same… We are at a loss to understand how the HC at the conclusion that in the case on hand a dispute to be resolved exists between the parties and further that to maintain harmony the FIR and all further proceedings thereto should be quashed even without adverting to the allegations raised in the FIR,” the bench said.
The accused as well as the girl’s father had questioned their locus standi in filing the appeal but the SC did not agree.
“In view of the nature of the offences alleged against the third respondent, one can only say that if they are proved they could be treated only as offences against the society and at any rate, it cannot be said that prosecuting an offender against whom such allegations are made is not in the interest of the society. In fact, it would only be in the interest of society… when by quashing the FIR by invoking the power under Section 482, CrPC, the accused was relieved of the liability to face the trial coupled with the aforesaid circumstances and the position of law qua locus standi of third party to maintain a petition… we have no hesitation to hold that the challenge on the appellants’ locus standi got no merit at all.”
The bench said that “the objects and reasons for the enactment of the POCSO Act… would undoubtedly show that quashing of proceedings initiated under POCSO Act abruptly… would go against the very intention of the legislature behind the enactment.”
Page source : Indian Express
