Delhi High Court Rejects Quashing Rape FIRs On Monetary Settlement; Says, ‘Justice Not For Sale’

The Delhi High Court refused to quash FIRs stating that the allegation of sexual violence cannot be quashed based on financial settlement.

Delhi High Court Edited by Updated: Jul 03, 2024, 12:15 pm
Delhi High Court Rejects Quashing Rape FIRs On Monetary Settlement; Says, ‘Justice Not For Sale’

Delhi High Court Rejects Quashing Rape FIRs On Monetary Settlement, Says ‘Justice Is Not For Sale’

The Delhi High Court while hearing a case related to sexual abuse observed that the cases cannot be quashed on monetary payments as it would imply that “justice is for sale”.

A bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said on July 1 ruling that the 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”.

Read also: Annamalai Takes Study Break From Politics, Aid Says No Link To Poll Defeat

This observation was made while hearing a plea filed by a man who requested for the quashing of FIR stating that he had entered into a settlement with the complainant and she was ready to settle for Rs 1.5 lakh.

However, the court refused to quash the case registered under Section 376 (rape). It was alleged that the woman was sexually assaulted by the accused four times. The victim and the accused met through social media.

The petition stated that the complainant lodged the FIR as she was angry.

The accused has misrepresented himself as being divorced and had engaged in sexual violence under the false pretext of marriage, reports Bar and Bench.

Later, two settled and agreed to quash the case on payment of Rs 12 lakh but considering the financial condition of the accused, the amount was finalised to Rs 1.5 lakh.

Opposing the relief, additional public prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar asserted that while lodging the FIR, the complainant leveled serious allegations against accused.

Read also: Hathras Stampede: Deputy SP Says, “We Did Not Find Bhole Baba Ji…”

The court in its 12-page verdict refused to quash the case. Justice Sharma said that the parties entered into a memorandum of understanding not only on the basis of the resolution of misunderstanding through family intervention but also in exchange for money.