Delhi High Court: In a petition seeking quashing of FIR for offence under Sections 137/65(1)/351 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’) and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO Act’) whereby the accused had submitted that quashing the proceedings would be in the interest of the prosecutrix and save her from stigma; a Single Judge Bench of Girish Kathpalia J., while dismissing the petition, sternly emphasised that the stigma of rape should lie on the perpetrator and not on the rape victim.
The accused had sought the quashment of FIR stating that the complainant i.e., the victim’s parents have reached a compromise with the accused. Per contra, the respondents contended that the accused is a Proclaimed Offender as on date and that the prosecutrix is a minor.
Perusing the matter and taking note of the submission that quashing of proceedings would save the prosecutrix from stigma, the Court termed the argument as “obnoxious” and stated that the stigma must be on the perpetrator and not the victim of the wrong. The Court further stated that:
“There has to be paradigm shift in societal mindset by attaching stigma to the accused and not to the girl who underwent the horrid suffering by way of rape.”
The Court observed further noted the contention that the prosecutrix’s parents have settled the disputes with the accused and found such argument to be devoid of merit. The Court said that it was the minor prosecutrix who was wronged and had suffered due to the act of the accused and not her parents. Thus, only the prosecutrix could have pardoned the wrongdoer, and that too under specific conditions.
The Court noted that according to the FIR the accused had made prosecutrix’s video and had blackmailed her to get in a physical relationship with him. Further it was noted that the accused had absconded and had been declared a Proclaimed Offender.
Therefore, as per the afore-stated perusal, the Court expressed that it would not be in the interest of justice to quash the proceedings against the accused. The Court, thus, finding no merit in the accused’s plea, dismissed the petition and directed the accused to deposit Rs 10,000 with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within one week.
[Altaf v. State (NCT of Delhi), CRL.M.C. 2363 of 2025, decided on 29-8-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioners: Sandeep Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent: Manjeet Arya, APP for State
Buy Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 HERE
