Court assists monetary settlement in rape: Delhi HC voice concerns

New Delhi: After a trial court judge here allegedly suggested to settle a rape case and assisted the accused for the same, the Delhi High Court expressed concerns. The trial court allegedly attempted to settle the case during the recording of prosecution evidence, The Indian Express reported.

The high court dismissed the accused man’s plea, demanding quashing of a 2020 FIR registered against him in a rape case, and expressed its observations of concern. The accused made the demand on the grounds that the case was settled between him and the survivor.

The high court ordered that another judge must put the case to trial to ensure justice is served.

The court, in its March 7 order, said that it was disturbed to learn that the trial court asked the survivor if she wished to enter into a compromise with the accused. The court noted that there was a Settlement Agreement, and it was recorded that the parties reached an agreement with the assistance of the trial court.

The court said that it was not able to understand why the trial court asked the women for a settlement after framing charges against the accused and recording prosecution evidence in a heinous case of rape. The court pointed out that the woman had stated in the Agreement that she entered into the agreement only because of the trial court’s demand. The Agreement “is duly notarized”, the court noted.

“Therefore, this Court expresses concern over the conduct of the learned Trial Court Judge, if it is true, that the Trial Judge had suggested and assisted the accused and the victim, in a case under Section 376 of IPC, to settle the matter, while the same Court was recording the prosecution evidence,” TIE quoted the court of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.

The Settlement Agreement demanded the man to pay 3.5 lakh to the women if the FIR is cancelled. She agreed in the document that whatever happened between the accused and herself was out of a consensual relationship.

Further, it stated that the woman testified against the accused in the court of “misunderstanding”. To this, the high court observed that exchanging money for a case of this gravity was an immoral proposition that “strikes at the very core of our criminal justice system”.

It said that rape is a heinous violation of a woman’s “bodily autonomy” and an offence against society. Allowing settlement of such a case is“trivializing the sufferings of a rape victim, and reducing her anguish to a mere transaction”, TIE quoted.

The high court further noted that if the case and proceedings followed were out of misunderstanding, the need for monetary compensation to settle the matter is questionable. The case before settlement specifically recorded the woman’s allegations that the man intoxicated her, performed sexual acts without her consent, recorded inappropriate videos and pictures of her and threatened her, the high court noted.