Rape case: Bombay High Court refuses to quash FIR

Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Monday refused to quash an FIR registered by a minor victim of rape, noting that since stringent provisions of the POCSO Act had been invoked in the case, the prosecution proceedings could not be quashed despite the girl's consent.

A bench of Justices B.P. Dharmadhikari and Revati Mohite-Dere was hearing a petition filed by the victim following an alleged incident of rape in June last year. The victim, a Mumbai resident, became pregnant after the incident and delivered a male child last month. While she relinquished her rights towards her son and gave the boy to an orphanage, she approached the high court saying the police had said that chances of the accused getting caught were grim, so the FIR in the case must be quashed.

She told the bench that she was in the first year of her graduation degree course and had no means to support herself or her child. She wished to end all proceedings in the case and thus, the FIR must be quashed.

The victim also argued through her lawyer that quashing the FIR would also be in the interest of the newborn child, who could then be given up for adoption. The state's counsel, Aruna Pai, told the bench that while the victim’s statement before the police and magistrate had been recorded, she had refused to give any information that could help establish the identity of the accused.

Therefore, it was very difficult to identify and arrest the accused person, Ms Pai told the court. The bench, however, dismissed Pai’s statement and said it was "highly unsatisfied" with the probe conducted in the case by the suburban Govandi Police Station.

“We cannot accept the police's statement that it does not have enough material to identify the accused,” the bench said.

The victim’s statement made before the police shows she has made some relevant disclosures,” the bench said.
 
It noted that provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act have also been invoked in the case. “Therefore, the arguments that there are grim chances of the accused being identified and arrested, and that the victim does not want to carry on with the case cannot be accepted,” the bench said while dismissing the petition.