Quashing of FIR for the offence of rape is quite rare in legal field as it is a heinious crime. As this is offence against society at large and that’s why it is very difficult to discharge the accused in such matters.

However, in some peculiar circumtances this FIR can be quashed when it is for the future development of the complainant and when complainant herself request for quashing of such FIR.

Nowadays, wives for the extortion of money and harassment of the husband and his relatives files cases of sexual offence against them. They use these sensitive FIRs as a trap for them as they are women oriented sections and accused are not very easily get discharge from these cases.

While this is very sensitive matter and thats why courts also take these matters very seriously but nowadays courts looking at these matters very actively and giving very formulative orders.

Few days back one of client came to me for quashing of FIR filed against him under section 376 of Indian Penal Code then I firstly I have suggested him to go for settlement and then the settlement is done between the parties.

After that the quashing petition is filed in Delhi High Court and we have argued the matter and presented some of the jugements of Supreme Court and High Court where court has quashed this FIR based on compromise between the parties.

Here, I have discussed the case which is from our firm and we have successfully able to give relief to our client and FIR is quashed by Delhi High Court.i.e.,

In Sumeert Rathore &ORS Vs. State, the Delhi High Court has recently quashed charges of 376/354/498a/406/34 IPC. In this case initially court was reluctant to quash charges of 376 IPC but we gave a supreme court judgement.. Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030, while quashing an FIR under Section 376 IPC, had observed as under: “…13. It can thus be seen that this Court has clearly held that though the Court should be slow in quashing the proceedings wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, the High Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving the charge for the offence charged with. The Court has also to take into consideration as to whether the settlement between the parties is going to result into harmony between them which may

improve their mutual relationship. 14. The Court has further held that it is also relevant to consider as to what is stage of the proceedings. It has been observed that if an application is made at a belated stage wherein the evidence has been led and the matter is at the stage of arguments or judgment, the Court should be slow to exercise the power to quash the proceedings. However, if such an application is made at an initial stage before commencement of trial, the said factor will weigh with the court in exercising its power…”The case was quashed by the High Court on the ground that complainant do not want to proceed with the case

Here, are the other cases where court has quashed FIR filed under section 376 of IPC-

Arshad Ahmad & Ors v. State of NCT of Delhi (Criminal Writ Petition Case No. 1185 of 2022 & Criminal Miscellaneous Application Case No. 10056 of 2022)

FACTS OF THE CASE: Brief facts of the case are as follows; A petition was filed for quashing an FIR registered under Sections 376/377/498-A of the IPC. The charge sheet had been filed under Section 376 of the IPC, but, in her statement given under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the complainant stated that her father-in-law had made only a rape attempt. The complainant told the Court that she had entered into a compromise out of her own free will and had no objection to quashing the FIR.

JUDGEMENT: After reviewing the submissions of both the sides, the Court observed that the practice of registering cases under Sections 376 (rape), 354 (assaulting a woman) and 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which are later brought to Court for quashing, needs to be curbed. The Court quashed a First Information Report (FIR) registered by the woman against her father-in-law after finding that the parties had reached a compromise. “The fact that nowadays Sections 376 and 354 of IPC are being used along with Section 498-A IPC, which later are compromised and are brought to the court for quashing, needs to be curbed,” read the Court’s order.

The Court said that cases under Section 376 IPC should not be quashed in ordinary circumstances and should be viewed as crimes against society at large. However, in the peculiar circumstances of the matrimonial dispute case, where the woman said that her future depends on the quashing of the FIR and that rape was not committed upon her, it will be in the interest of justice that if the FIR in its entirety is quashed, the Court ruled. While noting that the complainant had received a demand draft of ₹10 lakh towards the compromise, the Court saw it fit to quash the case, convinced that doing so would ensure a better future for all the parties. Because of the “overall facts and circumstances of the case. The Court appreciated the stand taken by the complainant and stated, “The complainant is a young lady who is looking for a bright future for herself, which depends on quashing of the present FIR according to a settlement which she states before this Court, she has entered out of her free will and without coercion, pressure or threat. She also stated that it was a family dispute, and she no longer wants the same to be tried in any Court of law.” The Court said that any case coming to an end was a welcome step as it decreased the pendency of the courts.

In case of VIKAS KUMAR &ORS. Vs. THE STATE & ANR., 2022 the Delhi High Court have quashed the FIR filed under section 376 IPC on basis of compromise which was filed against Father-in-law and Brother-in-law by the complainant.

In case of KAPIL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.,2022, SC has quashed the FIR filed under section 376 IPC as the matter was amicably settled and therefore, the petition for quashing the proceedings under section 482 of Cr. P.C. is allowed by the court. Court has considered that the main purpose of the court is provide justice to the complainant and where complainant herself settled the matter then court can allow quashing as this essential step toward development of her future.

Though ordinarily, cases under Section 376 IPC should not be quashed and should be taken as a crime against the society at large, however, in the peculiar circumstances of this matrimonial dispute case where the complainant states that her future depends on quashing of the FIR and states that rape was not committed upon her, it will be in the interest of justice that if the FIR in its entirety is quashed, in these matters.

Bonus Judgement–Our Firm Case…In Sumeert Rathore &ORS Vs. State the Delhi High Court has recently quashed charges of 376/354/498a/406/34 IPC. In this case initially court was reluctant to quash charges of 376 IPC but we gave a supreme court judgement.. Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT
of Delhi, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030, while quashing an FIR under Section
376 IPC, had observed as under:
“…13. It can thus be seen that this Court has clearly held that
though the Court should be slow in quashing the proceedings
wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, the High
Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists
material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether
there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving
the charge for the offence charged with. The Court has also to
take into consideration as to whether the settlement between the
parties is going to result into harmony between them which may
improve their mutual relationship.

14. The Court has further held that it is also relevant to consider
as to what is stage of the proceedings. It has been observed that
if an application is made at a belated stage wherein the evidence
has been led and the matter is at the stage of arguments or
judgment, the Court should be slow to exercise the power to
quash the proceedings. However, if such an application is made
at an initial stage before commencement of trial, the said factor
will weigh with the court in exercising its power…”The case was quashed by the High Court on the ground that complainant do not want to proceed with the case

Nitish Banka

Nitish Banka is an advocate practicing in Supreme Court of India and can be reached at [email protected] or 9891549997