Prosecution In Serious Offences Like Rape Cannot Be Withdrawn Based On Forgiveness Of Victim: Meghalaya High Court
The Meghalaya High Court has held that the victim of rape expressing forgiveness towards the accused and wishing not to proceed further in the case is not a ground to quash the First Information Report (FIR) against the accused.
Justice B. Bhattacharjee further said it is for the Trial Court to decide whether there was a presence of consent based on such forgiveness.
The bench was considering the petition of the accused/petitioners under Section 482 Cr.PC for quashing the FIR against them under Section 376D/34 for offence of gang rape.
The accused/petitioners claimed that the victim in a letter addressed to the Rynjah Police Station, Shillong had stated that she had forgiven the accused and since they were were very young, she did not want to proceed any further in the case against them. The accused/petitioners contended that the letter of the victim showed consent and since she was a major, presence of her consent would nullify the charge against them. Therefore, it was a fit case to quash the FIR against them.
The Court noted the trial for the case is in early stages and evidence of prosecution has not yet been concluded. It stated that the letter of the victim indicates that she had forgiven the accused/petitioners and did not wish to proceed with the case. However, the Court stated that it is for the Trial Court to decide on the basis of evidence produced during trial whether the letter of the victim could be interpreted as a presence of consent.
It observed “Even if it is assumed at this juncture that the survivor has forgiven the petitioners, there is nothing in law which can result in quashing of the proceeding on the basis of such forgiveness.”
It stated that in the case of Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab (2012), the Supreme Court laid down that the serious offence such as rape cannot be settled or withdrawn based on based on forgiveness from survivor or any agreement between the parties.
The Court thus held “In such a situation, the petition filed by the petitioners has no merit.” It stated that the accused/petitioners have liberty to raise the question of consent before the Trial Court and dismissed the petition.
Case title: Shri. Tenzin Tsephel & Anr. vs. State of Meghalaya & Ors. (Crl. Petn. No.39 of 2024)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Meg) 17