Delhi High Court rejects the accused’s plea to quash rape case under POCSO, imposes Rs 10,000 costs, stressing stigma must remain on perpetrator, not the victim.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court rejected a petition to quash an FIR under the POCSO Act and BNS. The judgment highlights the non-compoundable nature of sexual offences against minors and stresses that stigma must be attached to perpetrators, not victims.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Altaf, approached the Delhi High Court seeking the quashing of FIR No. 391/2024 registered at Police Station Sarita Vihar. The charges were framed under Sections 137, 65(1)/351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
Altaf’s primary contention was that the matter had been “compromised” with the victim’s parents and that quashing the FIR would help avoid “social stigma” for the minor victim.
Also Read: Thane Rickshaw Driver Acquitted in POCSO Case Over Schoolgirl Modesty Allegation
Serious Allegations
According to the FIR:
- The minor victim was blackmailed into a physical relationship.
- The accused made explicit videos of the prosecutrix to coerce her into sexual acts.
- Despite the gravity of these charges, the accused had been evading the law and was already declared a Proclaimed Offender at the time of filing the petition.
The Court noted that such conduct—absconding from the law—was itself enough to disentitle him from seeking extraordinary relief like quashing an FIR.
Court’s Observations
Justice Girish Kathpalia strongly rejected this contention, noting that the argument was “obnoxious” and ran contrary to the spirit of laws protecting children from sexual exploitation.
“The stigma has to be, not on the victim of the wrong, but on the perpetrator of the wrong. There has to be a paradigm shift in societal mindset by attaching stigma to the accused and not to the girl who underwent the horrid suffering by way of rape.”
The Court clarified that the right to forgive or pardon lies only with the victim and not with her parents. In this case, since the prosecutrix continues to be a minor, any compromise between her parents and the accused has no legal sanctity.
“It is the minor girl, and not her parents, who was wronged and suffered because of the alleged act on the part of the petitioner.”
Factors Considered:
- The accused had been declared a Proclaimed Offender and was absconding.
- The allegations in the FIR included blackmail, sexual exploitation, and making of explicit video recordings to coerce the minor into physical relations.
- Given the severity of the allegations and the legal framework of the POCSO Act, the Court emphasized that such cases are non-compoundable and cannot be quashed merely on the basis of compromise.
Final Order:
The Delhi High Court:
- Dismissed the petition.
- Imposed Rs 10,000 as costs on the accused, directing him to deposit the amount with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee (DHCLSC) within one week.
- Sent a copy of the order to the trial court to ensure compliance.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate
Respondent: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State.
Case Title:
Altaf v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
CRL.M.C. 2363/2025 & CRL.M.A. 10629/2025
READ JUDGMENT HERE
Click Here to Read More Reports on Sex Education