Offences Under Section 377 of IPC and Section 4 of POSCO Act are not Private in Nature: Delhi HC

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad denied quashing an FIR in spite of a settlement between the parties. The Court stated that the offences under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act are not private in nature.

The father of the victim cannot be permitted to settle a dispute with accused: HC

The Court in its order stated that "The father of the victim cannot be permitted to settle the dispute with the accused. He is not the victim and the courts have to safeguard and protect the interest of children against the onslaught by bad forces. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the accused is being prosecuted for an offence that shocks the value system of society and this is not a matter that can be permitted to be settled as a compoundable minor offence. Deterrence to others committing a similar offence is a must and they cannot get a signal that anything and everything can be compromised...The court cannot permit quashing of the FIR because the father of the victim has decided to enter into a compromise with the petitioner/accused."

Delhi High Court further stated that we must not side-line the fact that the charged made out on is for an offence that shocks the value system of society and this is not a matter that can be permitted to be settled as a compoundable minor offence.

Accused charged for sodomising a seven-year-old boy

In the present scenario, the accused was charged for sodomising a seven-year-old boy, for which the FIR has been registered. After the investigation, the Police filed a final report stating that there was enough material to proceed against the petitioner for offences under Section 377 IPC and Section 4, POCSO Act. However, because of societal intervention, the parties decided to compromise, where after the accused approached the court for quashing of the FIR, under Section 482 of the CrPC.

The Court on that basis noted that while exercising its powers under Section 482 CrPC, the High Court should scan the entire facts to find out the thrust of allegations and the crux of the settlement. Also, there is nothing that the HC has to exercise its power fairly and with caution in respect to cases which are not compoundable.

 Quashing FIRs would not secure the interest of justice: HC

The charge sheet, which recorded the statement of the child given to the investigating officer, showed that there was sufficient material to proceed against the petitioner/alleged offender, the court added.

The court while refusing to quash the FIR, held that the present order was only a prima facie reaction and that the court trying the case was expected to decide the case without being inhibited by any remarks. Further, the Court desisted from imposing any costs on the parties for filing a plea as it would cause serious prejudice to the rights of the petitioner/alleged offender.