7r _ --

AZadr:a
Amrit Mahotsav

OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ROHINI COURTS, DELHI

3(A)/N-W & NIRCl2024 Delhi, dated .

Sub: Judgment dated 07.03.2024 passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in

Crl. M.C. No. 753/2024 titled" Virende.o Chahal @ Virender Versus State
and Anr."

Copy of letter bearing No. 18877/CrJ. dated 14.03 .2024, received from
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, along with a copy of judgment dated 07.03.2024
passed by Hon'ble Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta hanna of Delhi High Court in [Link].
M.C. No. 753/2024 titled" Virender Chahal @ Virendef Versus State and Anf. " is
being forwarded (through electronic mode) for information and necessary action!
conlpliance to :-

1. All the Ld. Judicial Officers (DHJ & J) and North District,
Rohini Courts, Delhi.

2. The Dealing Official, Computer Branch Rohini COUTts, Delhi for uploading the
same on WEBSITE.

3. The Dealing Official, R & I Branch, Rohini Courts, Delhi for uploading the same
on LAYERS .

(VINODY AV)
District Judge, Comm. Court-02 (N/W)
Officer In-charge, General Branch
North- West & North District
Rohini Courts Complex, Delhi '
 u

0/0

HIGH COURT or . ..". ,

From : f ". t "II . .9?; -. ... 7 *' I \ .: . ! ,
The Registrar General , Of,' :Jo of ')ist<ict e. GE:SS 01-": ,llI d( i' .',
.
D e II11' Iligh 1-'!Tlffl _OG,Ihi High Cm,:-!1 :,j 3al)
Delhi.
Court,
' .
0
J la /)' L.-g. . . ... . .. .
1'0:
I. Tile PA to Registrar General, Delhi High Court, New Delhi . '
2. The Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge (HQ)/ Central, TIs Hazan.
. l'
DelhI.
rv F
3. Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, West, Tis Hazari Court, DeIhl. .
4. I ,earned Principal District & Sessions Judge, New Delhi, Patiala House .G. Court3 Deff-!
5. Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, South, Saket Courts, Deihl. '.- . - n .':'e. "
6. Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, South-East, Saket Courts, Deihl. . .
7.
Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, East; Karkardooma Courts, Deihl. .
8. Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, North East, Karkardooma Courts, Deihl.
9. Learned 'Pr(ncipal District & Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.
ve:[Link] Principal District & Sessions Judge, North West, Rohini Courts, Delhi.
11. Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Outer District, Rohini Courts, Delhi.
12. Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, North, Rohini Courts, Delhi.
13 . Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, SOllth West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi.
14. Learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, ROllse Avenue Courts, Delhi.
15 . Learned Additional Sessions Judgc- 04 , Patiala House Courts,- New Delhi or I

successor court.
16. The Director(Academics) , Delhi Judicial Academy, Address: H2XF+QH2, Pocket 1,
Sector 14 Dwarka , Dwarka , Delhi , 110075
17. Thc SHOIIO/AO Police Station:- Vas ant Kunj North , .New Delhi

C RL.M .C :\0. 753/2024

VIRE ND ER CHAHAL @ VIRENDER .................... Pctitioner

[Link]
STATE AND ANR .................... Respondent

Crimin a l Miscellaneous. Petition. Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure.
.
197 3 (C. r.P.C)
.
for seekmg Quashmg of FIR No 3890f2020 Reg'st
. ' ,
d t P0 I'Ice
1 ere a
StatIOn Vasant KunJ North for the Offence Pumshable Under Section 376 Of Th · I d' P 1
Code, 1860 , e n Ian ena

S i rI:vt adam,
I forward herewith immediate compliance/necessar acti .
.03.2024 passed 111 the above case by Hon'ble Ms Justice S K Y on a copy of [Link]
. . warana anta Sharma of this Court.
necessary directions arc contained in the enclosed co f d
. o(J;)· PY 0 or er .

..
, • I :' Copy of order datcd :07.03 .2024
and Memo of Parties. Admn.
 IN THE ruGB. COURT OF DELID AT NEW
. DELID
CrI. M.C. No:
- - of 2024
IN THE MAnER OF:-
Virender Chahal @ Virender ... Petitioner

Versus
State & AIir. ... Respondents

MEMO OF PARTIES

.Chahal @ Virender
S/o Sl1. Jagbir Singh
Rio Village Nimri, P.O. Baund Kalan
Distt.: Charkhi Dadri
PIN-127025
PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State
Through the SHO
PS Vasant Kunj North
South-West Delhi-II 0070
RESPONDENT No.1
2 . . Ms. X

RESPONDENT No.2

Petitioner

Through:
 4

. Dr. Surender Singh Hooda

Advocate for the Petitioner
B-40, LGF, South Extension-ll
New Delhi-l10049
Mobile No.:+91-9868280166
E-mail id:sshooda65@[Link]
PLACE: NEW DELHI
DATE·D:23.0 1.2024
 202 i : DHC: 190)

$-
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Reserved Oil: 31.01.2024

Prolloullced Oil: 07.03.2024

+ CRL.M.C.753/2024
VIRENDER CHAHAL @ VIRENDER ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.S. Hooda and Ms.
Rashmi Rawat, Advocates

versus

STATE AND ANR. ..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar,
APP for the State with SI
Mukesh Kumar, P.S. Vasant
Kunj (North).

CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
JUDGMENT
INDEX TO THE JUDGMENT
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE ................................................................... 3
J. r actsoftheCase ...................................................................................................... 3
IT . The ..................................................................................................... 5
ARGUMENTS ADDRESSED BEFORE THIS COURT .............................. 7
Q UASHING OF FIR ON THE BASIS OF SETTLEMENT: PRINCIPLES
TO BE FOLLOWED ....................................................................................... 8
I. G eneral Principles .................................................................................................... 9
IT . Can FIR registered under Section 376 of JPC be Quashed on the Basis of
Compromise? .......................................................................................................... 12
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ........................................................................ 13

CRL. M.C. 75312024 Page 1 of 23

 202 i : DHC : 190)

I. Circumstances Leading To Execution Of Settlement Agreement Between

The Accused And The Victim In the Presen t Case .......................................... 13
Contents of Se ttlement Agreement .............................................................. 14
Il. Beyond Bargain: Can i\-lonetary Consideration Become Ground for
Quashing FIR Registered under Section 376 o f IPC? ...................................... 15
TTl. The Role [Link] Trial Court ......................................................................... 18
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 20

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

I. At the threshold of adjudication in the present case lies an
important question for consideration: Should this Court invoke its
inherent powers to quash an FIR alleging commission of offence of
rape, on the ground of matter having been compromised between the
accused and the victim? What increases this dilemma is the
revelation that the very suggestion to explore such a compromise
emanated not from the disputing parties, but from the learned Trial
Judge itself.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court, by way of present
petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 ('Cr.P. C. '), seeking quashing of FIR bearing no. 389/2020,
registered against the petitioner at Police Station Vasant Kunj North,
Delhi , for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (,fPC,) and all consequential proceedings
emanating therefrom, on the ground that the matter has been settled
and compromised between the parties.

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 2 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

I. Facts of the Case

3. On, 15.10.2020, a complaint was received by the police against
the accused i.e. petitioner, regarding commission of rape and
blackmailing the victim i.e. respondent no. 2 by extending threats of
making her photographs viral on social media. The victim had
mentioned in her complaint that her husband used to remain out of
station most of the time, and in the month of April, she had
befriended the accused/petitioner on Facebook, who had
impersonated himself as a traffic policeman, who was a bachelor and
deployed on duty in Tughlaqabad, Delhi. The victim had sent a
message to him and thereafter, she had also disclosed her address to
him. As alleged, the accused had visited her at 6:00 AM on
23.08.2020 when her husband had gone out, and he had also brought
some snacks and cold drinks. The accused had asked the victim to
bring a glass and had poured the cold drink into that glass and had
offered the same to her. It is alleged that the victim had become
unconscious immediately after drinking the cold drink and when she
had regained consciousness, she had found herself in bed, without
any clothes, and the accused was also sitting on the bed. The accused
had then shown her some nude photographs and had told her that
from now onwards, she will have to follow the commands of the
accused, or else, he would upload her inappropriate photographs on
social media. It is further alleged that the accused had also told her
that he will send a boy in the evening and she should come along

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 3 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

with him. At about 7:30 PM on the same day, a boy had come outside
her house in a white colour Santro Car, and he had taken her in the
said vehicle to a hotel. The accused had met the victim there and had
taken her to a hotel located in front of Gurgaon Bus Stand and had
committed rape upon her at 12:30 AM including unnatural sex with
her forcibly, and had thereafter dropped her at her house on the next
day morning. He had also allegedly extended threats to her that if she
disclosed the details of these incidents to anyone, he would post her
photographs on social media and also show the same to her parents
and her husband. The accused had also told her that whenever he
would call, she would have to come, or else, he would kill her
husband. On 02.09.2020, the accused had visited the victim's house
and had again establ ished physical relations forcibl y against her wish
by extending the same threats to her. She had not disclosed anything
to anyone or to the police as she was scared. The accused had also
taken her to a hotel in Tughalqabad, Delhi many times and had
committed rape upon her, and had also administered medicines to her
on several occasions. Allegedly, the accused had also threatened her
that since he was in Police, she could do no harm to him even by
lodging a complaint, and rather, he would be able to defame her in
the society. The accused had also shown photographs of several girls
in his mobile phone to the victim, who were in naked condition and
had told her that he had indulged in wrongful acts with all of them
but no one was able to make any complaint against him due to his
contacts and approach. Thereafter, the accused had kept on
committing rape upon the victim by blackmailing her on several

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 4 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

occaSIOns. On 0 l.l 0.2020, the accused had come to the house of

victim when she was alone, and had established physical relations
against her wish and had told her that he had been transferred to
Bihar and that she should accompany him to Bihar. When she had
refused to do so, he had told her neighbou rs that she was his wife and
she was married to him and he had also shown photographs of hers
with him and had told her that if she did not accompany him to Bihar,
he would kill her husband. On 04.10.2019 at about 6:00 AM in the
morning, she had recei ved a phone call that she should come to Bihar
as earl y as possible or else, he would get his husband killed. In these
circumstances, the victim had then made a complaint to the police.
When she had told the accused that she would lodge a complaint with
the police, he had sent Rs.27,000/- through PhonePe to her at about
3:30 PM on 05.10.2020, which she had given back to him at the same
time. The victim alleged that the accused had committed rape upon
her, prepared her inappropriate photographs and had extended threats
to her and her family members and therefore, legal action should be
taken against him.

II. The Investigation

4. During the course of investigation, the victim was medically
examined, and her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was also
recorded before the learned Magistrate. The mobile phone of the
victim was also taken into possession by the police. During
investigation, the account details of the complainant and the accused

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 5 of 23

 202 i : DHC : 19 0)

were also obtained, which revealed several entries of exchange of

money. The same reads as under:
" .. . During further course of investigation Notice U/S 9 1
CrPC were served upon Manager, Axis bank and Manager
SBI bank seeking details of account statement of
Complainant and accused. Thereafter account statement of
prosecutrix bearing acc. No. _ _ was analyzed wherein the
accused has sent/transferred around Rs.63000/- detail s of
which is-
1. Rs.IOS0/- and 1000/- on Dt. 24.08.20
2. Rs.2S00/- on Dt. 3 1.08.2020
3. Rs.1 3,OOO/- on Dt. 03.09.2020
4. [Link]/- on Dt. 06.09.2020
S. Rs.4000/- on Dt. 07.09.202044
6. Rs.6600/- on Dt. 10.09.2020
7. Rs.700/- on Dt. 11.09.2020
8. Rs.200/- on Dt. 16.09.2020
9. Rs. 300/- on Dt. 17.09.2020
10. Rs.3S00/- on Dt. 18.09.2020
11. Rs.2,OOO/- on Dt. 24.09.2020
12. Rs.2000/- on Dt. 2S.09.2020
13. Rs.27,OOO/- on Dt. OS. 10.2020
And Complainant also transferred around Rs.30,OOO/- to the
account of accused bearing acc. No. 000000020230732578
details of which are:-
I. [Link]/- on Dt. 30.08.2020
2. Rs.7,OOO/- and 700/- on Dt. 10.09.2020
3. Rs.27,OOO/- on Dt. OS . 10.2020 .. "

5. The accused was granted interim protection by the learned

Sessions Court on 06.11 .2020 with direction to join the investigation.
Mobile phone of the accused was also seized. The accused had
informed the police that he was in a consensual relationship with the
victim, and he even used to help her monetaril y.
6. Notices under Section 91 of Cr.P.c. were also served upon
some Hotels in question, and details of the accused and victim in the
entry registers were obtained. CDR analysis and phone location

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 6 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

analysis was also carried out. After conclusion of investigation,

chargesheet was filed for commission of offence under Sections
376/377/328/506 of IPC.
7. Thereafter, first supplementary chargesheet was filed
alongwith the FSL reports recei ved qua the voice samples of the
victim. Second supplementary chargesheet was also filed containing
the FSL report and analysis of the mobile phone of the
accused/petitioner.

ARGUMENTS ADDRESSED BEFORE THIS COURT

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the victim
and the accused were in a consensual relationship for a very long
period of time, and the petitioner was falsely implicated in this case.
It is submitted by the learned counsel that on 08.12.202 3, the learned
Trial Court had put a specific query to the victim i.e. respondent no. 2
regarding settlement of the case, to which she had agreed to settle the
matter. Consequently, the parties have arrived at a compromise and
have entered into a Settlement Agreement dated 06.01.2024. It is
stated that as per the said Settlement Agreement, the petitioner has
agreed to pay a sum of Rs.3,50,OOOI- to the victim! respondent no. 2,
and the victim has admitted that whatever had happened between her
and the petitioner, was out of her free will and they were in a
consensual relationship. It is further pointed out that the Agreement
mentions that the respondent no. 2 has also accepted that she has
deposed against the petitioner in her statement recorded under

CRL.M.C. 75 312024 Page 7 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. and during her examination-in-chief

before the learned Trial Court, due to misunderstanding. Therefore, it
is prayed that the FIR in question be quashed, since the matter has
been settled between the parties.
9. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, argues that the
allegations against the petitioner/accused are serious and grave in
nature, and the victim has supported the case of prosecution in her
statements recorded under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.c. as well as
before the learned Trial Court. It is prayed that since the settlement
agreement in this case clearly reveals that the accused is paying
money to the victim to get the FIR in question quashed, the present
petition therefore should be dismissed.
10. This Court has heard arguments advanced on behalf of both the
parties, and has gone through the material that is available on record.

QUASHING OF FIR ON THE BASIS OF SETTLEMENT:

PRINCIPLES TQ BE FOLLOWED

II. The petitioner and respondent no. 2 have approached this

Court, seeking quashing of FIR registered for offence under Section
376 of IPC. In such circumstances, this Court has to remain guided
by the principles propounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court, which
govern the Constitutional Courts while adjudicating petitions seeking
quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of settlement!
comprorruse.

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 8 of 23

 202 i : DHC : 190)

I. General Principles
12. The Hon' ble Apex Court in case of Naril/der Sil/g" v. State of
PUI/jab (2014) 6 see 466, after taking note of its earlier decision in
case of Gial/ Sil/g" v. State of PUI/jab (2012) 10 see 303, had laid
down the following principles which would guide High Courts in
adjudicating cases relating to quashing of criminal proceedings on the
basis of settlement:

"29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay

down the following principles by which the Hi gh Court
would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the
settlement between the parties and exercising its power under
Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and
quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement
with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:
29.1 . Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be
di stingui shed from the power which lies in the Court to
compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No
doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has
inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in
those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties
have settled the matter between themselves. However, thi s
power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.
29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on
that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is
filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: (i)
ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any
court. While exerc ising the power the High Court is to form
an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.
29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those
prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences
of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity,
etc . Such offences are not private in nature and have a
serious impact on society. Similarly, for the offences
alleged to have been committed under special statute like the
Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by
public servants while working in that capacity are not to be

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 9 of 23

 202 i : DHC : 190)

quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the

victim and the offender.
29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having
overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character,
particularl y those ari sing out of commercial transactions or
ari sing out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes
should be qu ashed when the parties have resolved their entire
di sputes among themselves.
29.5. While exercising its powers, the High Court is to
examine as to whether the poss ibility of conviction is remote
and bleak and continu ation of criminal cases would put the
accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme
injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the
crim inal cases."
(Emphasis supplied)

13. In Parbathhai Aallir Alias Parbatllblwi Bilimsil,Ilhhai

Karmur v. State of Gujrat (2017) 9 see 641, three-Judge Bench of
the Ron ' ble Apex Court, after referring to several judicial precedents,
had summarized the following principles:

" 16. The broad principles which emerge from the precedents
on the subject, may be summari sed in the following
propositions:
16.1. Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High
Court to prevent an abu se of the process of any court or to
secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new
powers. It only recogni ses and preserves powers which
inhere in the High Court.
16.2. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to
quash a first infol111ation report or a criminal proceeding on
the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the
offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of
juri sd iction for the purpose of compounding an offence.
While compounding an offence, the power of the court is
governed by the provisions of Secti on 320 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973. The power to quash under Section
482 is attracted even if the offence is non -compoundable.

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 10 of 23

 202 i : DHC : 190)

16.3. In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or

complaint should be quashed in exerc ise of its jurisdiction
under Section 482, the High Court mu st evaluate whether the
ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent
power.
16.4. While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide
ambit and plenitude it has to be exerci sed (i) to secure the
ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of
any court.
16.5. The decision as to whether a compl aint or first
infonnation report should be quashed on the ground that the
offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves
ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no
exhausti ve elaboration of principles can be formulated.
16.6. In the exercise of the power under Section 482 and
while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled,
the High Court must have due regard to the nature and
gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences
involving mental depravity or offences such as murder,
rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed though
the victim or the family of the victim have settled the
dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in
nature but have a serious impact upon society. The
decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded
on the overriding element of public interest in punishing
persons for serious offences.
16.7. As di stingui shed from serious offences, there may be
criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant
element of a civil dispute. They stand on a di stinct footing
insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is
concerned.
16.8. Criminal cases in volving offences which ari se from
commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar
transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in
appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have
settled the di spute.
16.9. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal
proceeding if in view of the compromise between the
disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the
continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause
oppression and prejudice; and

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 11 of 23

 202 i : DHC : 190)

16. 10. There is yet an excepti on to the principle set out in

propositions 16. 8. and 16.9. above . Economic offences
involv ing the financial a nd economic well-bei ng of the State
have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere
di spute between private disputants. The High Court would be
justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved
in an acti vity akin to a financial or economic fraud or
mi sdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of
upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the
balance."
(Emphasis supplied)

II. Can FIR registered under Section 376 of IPC be Quashed

on the Basis of Compromise?
14. If one takes note of the above· referred precedents, it would
emerge that the consistent view that has been expressed by the
Hon ' ble Apex Court in catena of judgments is that an FIR which has
been registered for commi ssion of serious offences, induding offence
of rape, should not be quashed on the basis of settlement or
compromise arrived at between the victim and the accused.
15. In State o/M.P. v. Madallial (20 15) 7 see 681, the Hon ' ble
Apex Court had expressed that:
"We wou ld like to clearly state that in a case of rape or
attempt of rape. the conception of compromise under no
circumstances can really be thought of."

16. At the same time, it is also true that the Hon' ble Apex Court
has also expressed that it is not an absolute rule that the FIR
registered for offence under Section 376 of IPC cannot be quashed on
the basis of compromise in any case. However, it is important to note
that such cases adjudicated by the Constitutional Courts, induding
the Hon'ble Apex Court and the High Courts, often relate to those

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 12 of 23

 202 i : DHC : 190)

situations where the victim and the accused are in relationship for a
long period of time and FIR is registered owing to some
misunderstanding, and they later get married to each other and start
living together. Such intervention may also be made in cases where
prosecution for offence under Section 376 of IPC has been an
offshoot of some matrimonial dispute, in larger interest and for
ensuring justice.
17. Needless to say, whi le adjudicating quashing petitions in such
cases, the Courts will have to analyse all the facts and circumstances
of a case including the contents of the FIR, statement of the victim
recorded before the Magistrate, testimony recorded before the Trial
Court, terms of settlement, et al.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

I. Circumstances Leading To Execution or Settlement

Agreement Between The Accused And The Victim In the Present
Case

18. The proceedings that took place in the present case are crucial
to be taken note of. It is clearly revealed from the chargesheet, as
well as from the contents of petition, that the victim/respondent no. 2
had levelled serious allegations of rape on multiple occasions,
blackmailing the victim and extending threats to her, unnatural sexual
intercourse, etc. against the accused/petitioner. She had reiterated her
version given at the time of registration of FIR, in her statement
recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate.

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 13 of 23

 202 i : DHC: 190)

Charges in this case were framed against the accused, and the trial
had begun. Thereafter, two supplementary chargesheets were also
fil ed before the learned Trial Court. Charge was framed against the
accused under Sections 376/328/354C/506/376(2)(n) of IPC vide
order dated 05.04.2022.
19. This Court further notes that the examination-in-chief of
respondent no. 2 i.e. the victim in this case had al so been recorded
partl y before the learned Trial Court on 17.07.2023 , wherein also, she
had supported the case of prosecution and deposed against the
present petitioner. There are specific allegations in the testimony
regarding accused intoxicating the victim at her home and then
establishing physical relations with her, without her consent, as well
as of recording inappropriate photographs and videos of the victim
and thereafter extending threats to her. Thereafter, the acc used had
allegedly established physical relations with the victim forcefull y on
two other occasions also and had extended threats to her.
20. However, as informed to this Court and as mentioned in the
settlement agreement, the learned Trial Judge had asked the
victim on 08.12.2023 as to whether she wished to settle the matter
with the accused. It was on this query put by the learned Trial Judge,
that the accused and the victim had decided to compromi se the
matter.

COlltellts of Settlement Agreement

2 1. Since the quashing of FIR has been sought on the strength of a
Settlement Agreement entered into between the accused and the

CRL. M .C. 75312024 Page 14 of 23

 202 i : DHC : 190)

victim, the contents of the Agreement dated 06.01.2024, relevant to

be considered, are reproduced hereunder:

" I. The Accused agrees to pay a sum ofRs. 3.50.000/- (Three

Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) to the Prosecutrix subj ect to
quashing of the FIR.
2. The Accused agrees to prepare a demand draft of Rs.
3,50.000/- in favour of the Prosecutrix to be presented on the
date of hearing before the Hon 'ble High Court.
3. The Accused agrees that the said demand draft shall be
immediately handed over to the Prosecutrix if the Hon'ble
High Court allows quashing of the FIR.
4. The Prosecutrix further agrees that she has deposed against
the Accused in her statement recorded uls 16 1 Cr. P.c.. 164
Cr.P.c. and during her examination in chief before the Ld.
Trial Cou rt due to mi sunderstanding.
5. The Prosecutrix furth er agrees and states that whatever
happened between her and the Accused had happened out of
her free will and it was a consensual relationship.
6. The Prosecutrix furth er agrees she does not wish to carry
on with the prosecution of the Accused and intends to get the
FIR quashed.
7. That the Parties agree to take all necessary steps including
affirming of Affidavits in their endeavour to get FIR No. 389
of 2020 dated 15.10.2020 registered at P.S. Vasant Kunj
North quashed."

II. Beyond Bargain: Can Monetary Consideration Become

Gronnd for Qnashing FIR Registered nnder Section 376 of IPC?

22. A bare perusal of the Settlement Agreement entered into

between the accused and the victim would reveal that the first clause
of the agreement mentions that the acc used would pay Rs. 3.5 lakhs
to the victim in the present case, if the FfR is quashed by thi s Court.

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 15 of 23

 202 i : DHC: 190)

23. Money, it seems, is to be exchanged for getting a quietus to

the present criminal proceedings for offence of rape-a
proposition that is not only immoral but also strikes at the very
core of our criminal justice system.
24. In this Court' s opinion, the offence of rape is a heinous
violation of a woman' s bodily autonomy and it stands as an offence
against the society. While the Courts are often tasked with the
responsibility of ensuring fairness and at times, reconciliation
between the parties, there are certain areas where compromise is not
only inappropriate but also fundamentally unjust.
25. To allow a settlement, such as the present one, to crystallize
would amount to trivializing the sufferings of a rape victim, and
reducing her anguish to a mere transaction. It would amount to giving
a message to perpetrators of such offence that heinous act of rape can
be absolved by paying money to the victim, a notion that is as
repugnant as it is repulsive.
26. It is also strange to note that on one hand, the Settlement
Agreement mentions that the accused and the victim were in
consensual relationship and the victim had deposed against the
accused before the police, Magistrate, and Trial Court due to
misunderstanding. However, the same is at odds with the fact that the
accused is offering to pay a substantial amount of Rs. 3.5 lakhs to the
victim, as a part and parcel of compromise arri ved at between them.
This raises significant doubts and uncertainties about the claims made
within the Settlement Agreement. If the victim 's prior statements
given to the police, and to the learned Magistrate and before the

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 16 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

learned Trial Court were indeed based on a misunderstanding arising

from a consensual relationship, the need for monetary compensation
to settle the matter becomes questionable. Conversely, if the accused
is offering money to the victim, it may also imply an
acknowledgment of guilt on his part, which contradicts the assertion
of a consensual relationship.
27. Thus, the motives and intentions behind the proposed
compromise, as well as the credibility of the assertions made by both
parties are unclear at this stage. The potential manipulation or
coercion of the victim into accepting the settlement, particularly in
light of the serious nature of the allegations involved in the case,
cannot also be ruled out. At the same time, thi s Court also cannot
discover as to whether the allegations levelled against the acc used by
the victim were true or not, since this can only determined after a
full-fledged trial.
28. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon
the decision of Hon ' ble Apex Court in case of Kapil Gllpta v. State
of NeT of Delhi [Link].1217/2022 to contend that FIR for
offence of rape can be quashed on the basis of compromise, there is
no gainsaying that every case has to be decided on its own merits as
well as facts and circumstances. In case of Kapil Gllpta (supra), it
was categorically expressed by the Hon ' ble Apex Court that the stage
of proceedings is a relevant consideration while deciding quashing
petitions, and in the case before the Hon 'ble Apex Court, the
chargesheets had been filed but the charges had yet not been framed
and thus, the trial had not begun. Contrary to this, in the case at hand,

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 17 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

the trial has already begun and the victim had also deposed against
the accused in her partly- recorded examination-in-chief before the
learned Trial Court. Thus, the decision relied upon by the learned
counsel for petitioner can be of no help to him.

III. The Role of Learned Trial Court

29. This Court is disturbed by the fact that it was the learned Trial
Court Judge, as stated at bar as well as in the petition which is
accompanied by an affidavit regarding the truthfulness of averments
made in the petition, who had enquired from the victim if she wished
to enter into a compromise with the accused. The Settlement
Agreement in question also mentions the same, and in fact, the
A greement also records th at the parti es have arri ved at an agreement

"with the aid and assistance of the learned Trial COllrt".

30. The victim, who was present before this Court, also stated that
she has entered into a settlement agreement onl y at the asking of the
learned Trial Judge and this is mentioned in the Agreement itself,
which is dul y notari zed.
3 1. It was stated at bar, that after the examination-in-chief of the
victim had been recorded partly, the learned Trial Judge had
suggested that a certain amount of money be paid to the victim and
had asked her to settle the matter with the acc used. The counsel for
the accused also submitted before this Court that the counsel was
present in the Trial Court at the said time, and since they were not

CRL. M.C. 75312024 Page 18 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

able to pay the said amount, the matter was settled for a lesser
amount later.
32. The learned Trial Court in this case had framed charges against
the present petitioner/accused and the prosecution evidence was
being recorded before it. The v ictim' s examination-in-chief had also
been recorded partly, in which she had supported the case of
prosecution, as noted above. Thus, this Court is unable to
comprehend as to why the learned Trial Court Judge would have
asked the victim to settle the matter with the accused, which involves
offences of heinous nature such as Section 376 and 377 of IPC.
33. The role of the judiciary in the criminal justice system is one of
paramount importance, charged with upholding the basic principles
of rule of law, and justice, fairness, and impartiality. In cases of
heinous offences especially such as sexual assault or rape, the Courts
are tasked with the responsibility of conducting trials that are
transparent and as per law. Moreover, in cases invol ving commission
of offence of rape, the trial must be conducted with utmost sensitivity
and diligence.
34. The victim, as a key witness, deserves to be treated with
compassion and respect, and her testimony has to be given due
weight and consideration. Any suggestion of compromise with the
accused, particularly coming from the learned Trial Court itself,
would run counter to the very basic principles of our justice system
and fair trial.
35. Furthermore, the very notion of suggesting a compromise in a
case such as the present one reflects a fundamental mi sunderstanding

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 19 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

of the nature and gravity of offences like rape. These are not matters
which can be resolved through payment of money or out-of-court
settlements; they are crimes committed against the individual as well
as society as a whole, for which accountability has to be fixed ,
perpetrators are to be punished and justice is to be delivered to the
victims through the judicial process. It goes without saying that it is
incumbent upon the judiciary to uphold the dignity and rights of
victims of sexual assault, to ensure that they are afforded full
protection of the law.
36. Therefore, this Court expresses concern over the conduct of the
learned Trial Court Judge, if it is true, that the Trial Judge had
suggested and assisted the accused and the victim, in a case under
Section 376 of IPC, to settle the matter, while the same Court was
recording the prosecution evidence.

CONCLUSION

37. Time and again, the Hon' ble Apex Court as well as this Court
has held that criminal proceedings arlsmg out of heinous offence
such as rape cannot be quashed, merely on the basis of some
settlement agreement executed between the accused and the victim,
except in cases where there may be extraordinary circumstances to
show that continuation of criminal proceedings in a case of serious
nature would in fact result in abuse of process of law or miscarriage
of justice. As expressed in case of State of M.P. v. Mat/allial (supra),

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 20 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

under no circumstance can one even think of compro mi se in a case of

rape.
38. In the present case, the victim had levelled serious allegations
of sexual assault against the acc used i.e. petitioner herein in her
initial complaint, and the same were supported In the statement
recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. as well as in her party-
recorded testimony before the learned Trial Court. The prosecution
evidence is being recorded in the present case, and the allegations
against the accused are serious in nature of establishing physical
relations without consent, blackmailing, and threat of killing the
family members of the victim and posting her objectionable
photographs on social media. Whether the relationship was
consensual or non-consensual is a matter of trial and in case it would
have been found at a later stage that the victim had leveled false
allegations against the accused, the Court was at liberty to take
appropriate action against her.
39. However, this Court is concerned that in case, the learned Trial
Court Judge had suggested to the victim that she should enter into a
compromise with the accused, as stated at bar by the learned counsel
for the petitioner who was present in the Court at that time and the
victim in the interaction with this Court, for a certain sum of money,
which if true, is not acceptable and the Trial Courts need to be
sensitized in this regard.
40. Be that as it may, this Court is not delving deeper into the issue
of the compromi se being suggested by the learned Trial Court Judge,
as the petitioners are ultimately seeking quashing based on the

CRL. M.C. 75312024 Page 21 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

settlement, which cannot be allowed even on merit sailS the

comprorruse.
41. Moreover, the Settlement Agreement does not reflect as to why
the parties have settled the case, except the fact that the victim had
agreed to settle the case upon being asked by the learned Trial Court
Judge and that the accused is willing to pay Rs. 3.5 lakhs to the
victim in exchange of his exoneration in the present case.
42. Thus, having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of
the case, and the law laid down by the Hon 'ble Apex Court in the
judicial precedents, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
present petition for quashing of FIR, on the basis of compromise,
cannot be allowed.
43. Since this Court has rejected the present petition and the trial is
to take place before the learned Trial Judge, it will be appropriate and
in interest of justice, that the case is tried by another judge, lest
during trial any aspersion is cast regarding fair trial as averments
were made regarding the conduct of the trial judge in this petition.
This Court has passed thi s direction to ensure that justice should not
only be done but also seem to be done.
44. The judgment be circulated through the learned Registrar
General, Delhi High Court to all the learned Judges of District Courts
of Delhi. The covering letter of such circulation will not mention the
name of the judge of the Trial Court. A copy of the judgment be also
sent to the Director (Academics), Delhi Judicial Academy for taking
note of its contents.
45. In view thereof, the present petition stands dismissed.

CRL.M.C. 75312024 Page 22 of 23

 202i : DHC : 19 0)

46. It is however clarified that the observations made hereinabove

are solely for the purpose of deciding present petition and the same
shall not affect the merits of the case during the course of trial.
47. The judgment be uploaded on the website forthwith.

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

MARCH 7, 2024/zp

CRL.M.C. 75 312024 Page 23 of 23