Sexual harassment case cannot be closed on basis of compromise: Supreme Court

The HC had quashed the lawsuit exercising its inherent powers nether Section 482 CrPC “to marque specified orders arsenic whitethorn beryllium indispensable to springiness effect to immoderate bid nether this Code, oregon to forestall maltreatment of the process of immoderate Court oregon different to unafraid the ends of justice.”

A seat of Justices C T Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar referred to the SC’s 2012 determination successful Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, which it said had laid down successful unambiguous terms…that “before exercising the powerfulness nether Section 482, CrPC, the High Court indispensable person owed respect to the quality and gravity of the crime” and held that “heinous and superior offences could not beryllium quashed adjacent though a unfortunate oregon victim’s household and the offender had settled the dispute”.

Justice Ravikumar said “this tribunal held that specified offences are not backstage successful quality and person a superior interaction connected the society”, and that “it is the bounden work of the tribunal acrophobic to see whether the compromise is conscionable and just too being escaped from undue unit we volition proceed to see the substance further”.

It said that a bare perusal of the February 4, 2022 HC bid “would uncover that the High Court has erred successful not bestowing due information the law… The impugned bid would uncover that the allegations contained successful the taxable FIR was not astatine each adjacent adverted to, earlier quashing the same… We are astatine a nonaccomplishment to recognize however the HC astatine the decision that successful the lawsuit connected manus a quality to beryllium resolved exists betwixt the parties and further that to support harmony the FIR and each further proceedings thereto should beryllium quashed adjacent without adverting to the allegations raised successful the FIR,” the seat said.

The accused arsenic good arsenic the girl’s begetter had questioned their locus standi successful filing the entreaty but the SC did not agree.

“In presumption of the quality of the offences alleged against the 3rd respondent, 1 tin lone accidental that if they are proved they could beryllium treated lone arsenic offences against the nine and astatine immoderate rate, it cannot beryllium said that prosecuting an offender against whom specified allegations are made is not successful the involvement of the society. In fact, it would lone beryllium successful the involvement of society… erstwhile by quashing the FIR by invoking the powerfulness nether Section 482, CrPC, the accused was relieved of the liability to look the proceedings coupled with the aforesaid circumstances and the presumption of instrumentality qua locus standi of 3rd enactment to support a petition… we person nary hesitation to clasp that the situation connected the appellants’ locus standi got nary merit astatine all.”

The seat said that “the objects and reasons for the enactment of the POCSO Act… would undoubtedly amusement that quashing of proceedings initiated nether POCSO Act abruptly… would spell against the precise volition of the legislature down the enactment.”