Settlement Affidavit Cannot Be Relied On To Quash Rape Case, Nature Of Victim's Relationship With Accused To Be Decided In Trial: Kerala HC

Justice A. Badharudeen dismissed the petition filed by the accused stating that whether the relationship was consensual or not were matters to be decided in a trial. It was held that:

“Whether the relationship is consensual, is a matter to be decided during evidence and merely relying on the affidavit filed by the defacto complainant, this Court cannot quash the proceedings, holding that there are no materials, prima facie, to go for trial.”

The petitioner is the accused who has approached the Court for quashing the criminal proceedings alleged against him for offences punishable under Sections 450 (house trespass to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment for life) read with 376 (punishment for rape) of the IPC.

The specific allegation was that the petitioner trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant, tied her hands and subjected her to rape despite her resistance. It was also alleged that the petitioner took nude photographs of the defacto complainant.

The petitioner denied the allegations and stated that he had approached the Court for quashing proceedings based on the affidavit given by the defacto complainant for settlement.

The Public Prosecutor opposed the settlement based on the affidavit of the defacto complainant.

The Court stated that the High Court can exercise powers under Section 482 of CrPC to quash proceedings based on the settlement of parties even in non-compoundable offences. However, the Court stated that it must not invoke powers to quash serious offences that have a large impact on society based on compromise between parties.

In this case, the Court stated that prima facie serious allegations were made out against the petitioner and it cannot be quashed merely based on settlement affidavit.

“In such a case merely acting on the affidavit filed by the defacto complainant quashment of the proceedings could not be resorted to. In view of the matter, this petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.”

As such, the Court dismissed the petition and directed the petitioner to raise his contentions during trial.

Counsel for Petitioner: Advocates Aswin K R, A R Adheeth Lal

Counsel for Respondents: Public Prosecutor M P Prasanth, Arun Kumar M A

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 501

Case Title: Pradeep Kumar v State of Kerala

Case Number: CRL.MC NO. 1955 OF 2023

Click here to read/download Order