SC quashed two FIRs one of which involves rape
The Supreme Court (SC), in Madhukar & Others v The State of Maharashtra & Another. [ 2025 INSC 819], says the court has power under Section 482 the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) to quash criminal proceedings related to even rape, in exceptional circumstances, based on the facts of the case to secure ends of justice.
The SC was considering the appeals challenging the common order passed by the Bombay High Court dismissing two petitions filed under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of FIRS, including one involving rape charges, as the complainant unequivocally expressed her desire not to pursue the case, and a settlement was arrived at between the parties.
Offence is a grave one but cannot ignore the facts
The SC adds that the court recognises that the offence under Section 376 IPC is undoubtedly of a grave and heinous nature. Ordinarily, quashing of proceedings involving such offences on the ground of settlement between the parties is discouraged and should not be permitted lightly.
Parties do not want the cases to proceed
In this case both the parties had categorically taken the stand that they had resolved their disputes amicably and were desirous of moving on with their lives. The complainant in the second FIR, now married and residing with her husband, had expressed that continuation of the prosecution would cause further disruption in her personal life, and she did not wish to pursue the matter any further.
SC is faced with a peculiar situation
The SC confronted with an unusual situation where the FIR invoking serious charges, including Section 376 IPC, was filed immediately following an earlier FIR lodged by the opposing side. The sequence of events lends a certain context to the allegations and suggests that the second FIR may have been a reactionary step.
Continuation of the cases would end up as an abuse
The second FIR had consistently maintained, including through an affidavit on record, that she did not support the prosecution and wanted the matter to end. The parties had also amicably resolved their differences and arrived at a mutual understanding.
The SC holds that the continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would only amount to an abuse of process. Therefore, the court set aside the impugned order of the High Court and quashed the FIRs in question.
Reference
- Madhukar & Others v The State of Maharashtra & Another. [ 2025 INSC 819]
