The Bombay High Court has refused to grant relief to a man who sought quashing of a rape case against him on the ground that he had married the victim as it held that in serious offences, a settlement between the “offender and the victim” can have no legal sanction at all.
Mohammad Faizan Amir Khan had approached the high court seeking quashing of the FIR lodged against him lodged under section 376 of the IPC for allegedly raping his live-in partner on several occasions from the year 2014 after making a false promise of marriage.
Khan in his petition claimed that there was some misunderstanding between him and his partner due to which she was enraged and lodged the FIR and that the dispute has been resolved now and they are married.
A division bench of Justices N H Patil and P D Naik, however, observed that the accused agreed to marry the girl only after realising that a rape case was lodged against him.
“The conduct of the accused is required to be deprecated. It can be noted that after realising that FIR has been registered and the investigating machinery is looking for him, he came to Mumbai and purportedly solemnised the marriage,” the court said.
The bench noted that the marriage was held on April 29 this year and the present petition was filed on April 30 this year and immediately on April 30, the complainant victim tendered an affidavit giving consent for quashing the FIR.
“The approach of the accused is under clouds of suspicion. In view of the circumstances, although the petitioner (Khan) and the complainant (victim) have solemnised the marriage, we are not inclined to quash the FIR,” the court said.
Taking note of a Supreme Court order, the bench observed that in respect of serious offences like murder, rape, dacoity and so on, the settlement between the offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all.
As per the prosecution, the complainant met the accused in 2011 in Uttar Pradesh from where they started their relationship. In 2014, the accused came to Mumbai for a job and asked the girl to live with him to which she agreed. The duo maintained physical relation, which according to the girl was only because the accused promised to marry her.
However, in January this year the accused left for Uttar Pradesh without informing the victim and when she got in touch with him, the man said he was not coming back, and hence, would not marry her. Following this, the girl filed a complaint.