According to a recent ruling by the Delhi High Court, rape charges cannot be dismissed solely because the alleged rapist later married the victim. Racial violence, according to the Indian Penal Code (IPC), is a serious crime, and no amount of compromise between the parties is sufficient to quash a First Information Report or waive the punishment for rape (Indian Penal Code). Justice Mukta Gupta, a single-judge of the Delhi High Court, observed: The court ruled that "a subsequent marriage between a prosecutor and an accused does not absolve the accused of an earlier crime," and that "the Section 376 offense, which is a serious offense, cannot be quashed on the basis of a settlement between the parties." The order was issued in response to a petition seeking to vacate a First Information Report (FIR) filed under Sections 376 (punishment for rape) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Anil Kumar Sharma, the accused's lawyer, claimed that the First Information Report (FIR) was filed due to "confusion."
In the FIR, the accused was charged with forcible penetrative sexual assault after forcing the prosecutrix/victim into a hotel room despite her refusal. The prosecutrix claimed in the First Information Report (FIR) that she agreed to have sexual relations with the accused only after they married. The accused, however, paid no attention to this and went ahead with the crime, according to the complaint. However, the accused later married the prosecutrix and began living with her. Following that, he petitioned the Court to vacate the previous First Information Report (FIR) filed against him. The Court, however, refused to quash the First Information Report (FIR), concluding that no grounds for doing so had been established. As a result, the accused man's plea was dismissed. Avi Singh, the State's Additional Standing Counsel, represented the State.
Tags : #DelhiHighCourt #Rape #IPC #PromiseToMarry