Justice Vinod Diwakar, Allahabad High Court
"Appears To Be An Intra-Family Discord": Allahabad High Court Quashes Gang Rape Case Citing Settlement
|A gang-rape case under Section 376(D) IPC was filed by a woman against her brother-in-law.
The Allahabad High Court quashed a 2015 gang-rape case after taking into account a mutual compromise reached between the accused and the complainant.
The case pertained to allegations under Section 376(D) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with gang rape a serious and non-compoundable offence.
A bench of Justice Vinod Diwakar said, “Although the offence under Section 376(D) IPC is grave and non-compoundable in nature, involving allegations of gang rape, the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case merit consideration. The victim is close family members of the applicant, and the genesis of the dispute appears to be an intra-family discord rather than a criminal act impacting society at large and public morality.”
Despite the gravity of the charge, the Court acknowledged that the specific circumstances surrounding the case were highly unusual, warranting judicial consideration.
The Court noted that the incident arose from a family dispute involving the complainant and her brother-in-law (the accused), and not from a crime that posed a broader threat to public decency or societal order. According to the Court, the genesis of the case appeared to be rooted in intra-family discord rather than an act of criminal depravity with societal repercussions.
The Court placed emphasis on the fact that the complainant had entered into the compromise voluntarily, knowingly, and without any external pressure. It observed that, given the personal nature of the conflict and the familial relationship between the parties, pursuing the prosecution would serve no meaningful purpose.
The Court further emphasized that allowing the criminal case to proceed would amount to misuse of judicial processes, particularly in view of the amicable resolution between the parties. It invoked its inherent powers to prevent abuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of justice.
Advocate Praveen Kumar appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Vivek Sharma appeared for the Respondent.
The Court reiterated that in cases where the conflict is essentially private and personal, the High Court is justified in exercising its inherent jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings especially when an amicable settlement has been reached.
The Court concluded, “Considering the exceptional facts of the case and in the larger interest of justice, this Court is of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings against the applicant, and doing so would only result in unnecessary prolongation of litigation and judicial time.”
Cause Title: Rakesh Alias Rakesh Kumar v. State of UP & Anr., [2025:AHC:90696]