Upgrad LLM

Compromise under POCSO? Yes says Bombay HC, FIR quashed on paying Rs 50K for Lawyers Welfare

Compromise under POCSO? Yes says Bombay HC, FIR quashed on paying Rs 50K for Lawyers Welfare

Important Facts:

  • The Bombay High Court has recently quashed an FIR filed against a man, age 25 accused of sexual assault on a 17-year-old boy after victim's father and the accused reached a codial settlement.
  • The Court accordingly directed the Registry to deposit the amount of ₹50,000 submitted partly by accused and partly by the victim for showing bona-fides, with the District Bar Association for disbursement to Advocates in need due to Covid-19 financial distress.

Charges against the accused:

  • The accused has been booked for offences punishable under Sections 364-A, 342, 347, 212, 201, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8,12 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 66(k)(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
  • Later he filed an application for the quashing of the FIR under Section 482 of CrPC.

Additional information:

  • Additional Public Prosecutor, however have raised objection on entertaining the plea for quashing in the last hearing and submitted that the Court shouldn't indulge at a belated stage, that is after the filing of the charge-sheet. He contended that the Investigating Agency has already invested ample time on investigation.
  • The Court noted:

"Considering the nature of accusations made by the non-applicant No.2, the fact that the victim boy, though minor, was aged about 17 years at the time of the incident and as the parties have amicably worked out the matter and the trial has not yet commenced, we are of the view that no fruitful purpose would be achieved by keeping the trial pending and interests of justice would be sub-served by quashing the proceedings subject to utilising the amount deposited by the applicant and non-applicant No.2 for some appropriate purpose."

  • The order has been passed by Bench comprising of Justice ZA Haq and Justice SM Modak on 21-07-2020.

Do you think HC should allow compromise under the POCSO ACT? Please let us know in the comments below.

Tags :

Published in Criminal Law
Source : ,
Views : 308



CrPC MASTERCLASS!     |    x