Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1046 (DEL)

Jagdish Kohli v. State of Delhi

2014-03-27

INDERMEET KAUR

body2014
JUDGMENT : Indermeet Kaur, J. (Oral) 1. This petition seeks quashing of an FIR which has been registered under Sections 376/493 of the IPC at PS Preet Vihar. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has been informed that in view of the judgment of Apex Court in (2012) 10 SCC 303 Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another and keeping in view the averments made in the petition, this Court is not inclined to pass any order for quashing of the FIR. Learned counsel however insists in arguing the petition and states that he wants an order to be passed on merits. He has placed reliance upon the dicta of the judgment of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra) submission being that to secure the ends of justice, an FIR even under Section 376 of the IPC can be quashed. He has also placed reliance upon a judgment of a Bench of this Court in 2013 VIII AD (Delhi) 515 Rahul Verma Vs. State & Anr. The latter judgment was peculiar on its facts. Learned Single Judge had noted that Section 376 of the IPC had been added to the FIR later on; it had noted that there was no allegation of commission of the rape by the petitioner on the complainant. 3. Facts of this case are distinctively distinct. In the instant case, the parties, although originally married had had a divorce and the complaint of the complainant is that inspite of divorce, the petitioner forcibly committed rape upon her. This was also her version in the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC as also in her statement on oath in Court which this Court has been informed has already been recorded. Trial in the case is in progress and a large part of the evidence of the prosecution has in fact been recorded. 4. The Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh while dealing with the powers of the Court under Section 482 of the Cr.PC has held that even while exercising this power, the Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime and heinous and serious offence of mental depravity or offence like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. The Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh while dealing with the powers of the Court under Section 482 of the Cr.PC has held that even while exercising this power, the Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime and heinous and serious offence of mental depravity or offence like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute; such offences not being private in nature and have a serious impact on society. 5. Petition is without any merit. Dismissed with costs of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.