The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court ruled that a compromise in a rape case cannot justify quashing of an FIR under Section 482 of the CrPC. The court dismissed a plea by two accused men seeking to close a rape case. This was based on a settlement with the complainant. A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh stated that such compromises go against public interest. The complainant is a married woman with two children. She had alleged that she was forcibly taken to a lodge and raped after being drugged. Although she later claimed it was a misunderstanding and described the accused as “close friends,” the court found prima facie evidence supporting the FIR. Statements from the lodge owner and car owner also backed the woman’s claims. The judges emphasized that such cases are serious crimes and cannot be dismissed lightly.
They also noted the risk of coercion or influence over victims in these settlements. The court warned that the trial court can initiate perjury proceedings if the woman turns hostile. The bench ultimately held that misuse of compromise cannot override justice and refused to quash the FIR.
