Live
- Synergy Marine Group Champions Onboard AI Agriculture for Healthier Crews and a Greener Future
- BJP alleges Rs 45 cr scam by AAP govt in school construction
- Yashoda Medicity organizes “Crown of Courage” ceremony to honor Cancer Survivors
- AAP appoints two-time legislator Arora as Punjab chief
- BJP won’t succeed in toppling Congress govt: K’taka Home Minister
- Turkey neutralises five Kurdish militants in Syria
- BJP questions Kejriwal on 21,000 deaths in Delhi due to contaminated water
- CM Revanth Reddy Inspects Progress of Telangana Mother Statue Installation
- ‘It’s Congress habit to spread lies’, says Vinod Tawde after sending legal notice to Kharge, Rahul
- Hungarian PM invites Netanyahu for visit, calls ICC warrants 'brazen and cynical'
FIR cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement between kidnappers and parents: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has ruled that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise between alleged kidnappers and parents of a minor child.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has ruled that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise between alleged kidnappers and parents of a minor child.
A bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma was considering a plea seeking to quash an FIR registered at Delhi’s Bhalswa Dairy Police Station in 2017 for the alleged offence punishable under Section 363 (kidnapping) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The accused had contended that the matter has been settled between them and the parents of the minor girl and no purpose will be served by continuing the present criminal proceedings. It was pleaded that the accused couple had been taking care of the child and they were not aware that it had been kidnapped. They said that a lenient view may be taken since the accused could not have become biological parents of a child due to some medical problems.
However, the prosecution claimed that the accused Nisha and Kapil were aware about kidnapping of the child as they had bought the child for Rs 20,000 from the accused Rubina and such settlements must not be allowed in the larger interest of the society.
In her statement given to the Magistrate, the minor girl stated that the accused Rubina had kidnapped her and her younger brother and then she had handed over her and her brother to accused Kapil and Nisha. The minor boy had raised hue and cry and therefore, the accused had dropped him back.
"The case at hand presents unique circumstances. On one hand, there is a deeply troubling situation where a three-year-old minor girl, along with her younger brother, was kidnapped and subsequently sold to a couple by the accused. While the criminal act itself is distressing, a new layer of complexity has emerged as the parents of the kidnapped child have recently entered into a settlement with the accused persons," said the High Court.
It added that the idea that a girl child can be subjected to a transaction, where her custody is negotiated as if it was a piece of property, challenges the very principles of rule of law.
The High Court said that the crime in question cannot be obliterated by the fact that the kidnappers have looked after the child and she is attached to the kidnappers or offenders.
"This Court finds no reasons to quash the present FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed," it said.
