Recently, the Delhi High Court was posed with a question, whether a marriage between the offender and the victim of a rape case can be seen as ‘settlement’ and ‘good enough’ reason to quash an FIR as well as consequential hearings in the matter of rape. Therefore, answering, he said to question the Delhi HC has ruled that the crime of rape is of such nature that it falls under the category of “heinous and serious crime”. Given that, an FIR for such a kind of crime cannot be quashed even if the parties within themselves have ‘settled’ by way of marriage.
In India, there are a large number of instances where the victim knew the offender; such cases will come under the garb of this case. The number of such cases in which the offender is known to the victim is large. As per the Crime Statistics in India, 2017 published by the National Crime Records Bureau, there were a total of 32,559 rapes reported across the country in the year 2017. Of the total number of rapes, 10553 cases the victim knew the offender, as both were either friend, online friends live-in partners or separated couple. That accounts for 32.41% of the total number of cases, where the offender was either friend or live-in partner or separated spouse. It is also reported that in another 16,591 rape cases, the accused were either employer, family friend, neighbours or other persons known to the victim, accounting for another 50% of the cases. Therefore, in conclusion, in over 90% cases, the offender was known to the victim.
The Delhi HC pronounced the decision by the single bench Justice Brijesh Sethi. The subject of the petition said that a man accused of rape was requesting to quash an FIR for rape registered against him in September 2013 at the Safdarjung Enclave police station in Delhi by his live-in partner. As per the contents of the complaint, the women said that the man, who was her live-in partner took undue advantage of her vulnerable emotional stage and offered to marry him repeatedly owing to his ‘strong liking’. Her further complaint suggested that she agreed to establish cohabitation with him because she was falsely allured of marriage on repeated instances with him. The complaint further reveals that during this time, he started smoking and excessive drinking, after which he would force her to have sex with her, many times against the will of the girl.
It is to be seen that the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [CrPC] has a full ambit to decide upon the grounds of quashing any FIR. However, the immediate question as to whether or not an FIR can be revoked if the offender and the victim have ‘settled’ the matter by marrying each other, is not subject to any external application of the law. It is instead a question of fact and circumstances that prevailed, and there cannot be the formulation of an exhaustive elaboration of principles.
Therefore, in the instant matter of Ananda DV v. State & Anr., the Delhi HC held that rape is an offence falling under the category of ‘heinous and serious’ crimes. It observed that the offence of rape does not only cause severe injuries to a woman’s body but also impairs his honour and dignity. Given that even if such an attack gets settled between the offender and victim, it is to be seen that the nature of the crime is not private. It has the potential to impact the society and the norms therein severely; therefore it is not a valid ground for quashing the said FIR.