New Delhi, July 2: The Delhi High Court has firmly stated that cases involving allegations of sexual violence cannot be quashed based on monetary settlements, as doing so would imply that justice is for sale. This observation was made in the case of Rakesh Yadav & Ors v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasized that the first information report (FIR) in question highlights serious issues of self-respect, life, and death for the prosecutrix and her child, and contains her assertions of having evidence of 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,” Justice Sharma said.
The High Court made this observation while refusing to quash an FIR registered under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The woman in question alleged that she was sexually assaulted by a man four times after they met on social media. The accused had misrepresented himself as divorced and engaged in sexual violence with the woman under the false pretext of marriage.
The two parties had later settled the matter, agreeing to quash the case upon payment of ₹12 lakh, which was eventually reduced to ₹1.5 lakh considering the financial condition of the accused.
However, the Court held that an FIR in such a serious case cannot be quashed. “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, examining the facts in light of natural justice for both the complainant and the accused, while considering the broader implications for the community and the criminal justice system.
Advocate Shashak Jain appeared for the accused, while Additional Public Prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar, along with Advocates Jasir Aftab and Md Hedayatullah, represented the State.
