Inherent Powers Must Be Exercised Sparingly In Heinous Offences; Compromise In Rape Case Cannot Be Accepted In...
The principle that courts must exercise their inherent powers cautiously in serious crimes like rape, and that compromises in such cases are generally not allowed.
Explanation: Inherent Powers in Heinous Offences and Compromise in Rape Cases
What are Inherent Powers?
Courts have inherent powers to ensure justice and prevent abuse of the judicial process, usually under procedural laws or their constitutional mandate.
These powers can be used to quash or set aside criminal proceedings if they are frivolous, malicious, or an abuse of process.
Why Should Inherent Powers be Exercised Sparingly in Heinous Offences?
Heinous offences such as rape, murder, or terrorism involve serious violations of public order and societal values.
Such offences cause deep harm not only to the individual victim but to society at large.
Exercising inherent powers to quash cases in such offences risks undermining the rule of law and public confidence in the criminal justice system.
The criminal justice system has a duty to prosecute and punish serious crimes to deter offenders and protect society.
Compromise in Rape Cases: Why is it Not Accepted?
Rape is considered a non-compoundable offence in many legal systems, meaning it cannot be settled or compromised privately between parties.
This is because:
It is a crime against the individual and society, not just a private dispute.
Allowing compromise can lead to coercion, intimidation, or pressure on the victim to withdraw the complaint.
It risks denying justice to the victim and may embolden offenders.
Courts have consistently held that compromise in such cases is against public policy and the principles of criminal law.
Illustrative Case Reasoning (Generic but Reflecting Common Judicial Reasoning)
In cases where accused persons request quashing of charges citing a compromise with the victim:
Courts examine if the offence is compoundable (can be settled).
For heinous offences like rape, courts reject compromise petitions, emphasizing the victim’s dignity and public interest.
Courts rely on the principle that criminal justice is not a private contest but a matter of public interest.
Quashing in such cases is only permissible if the complaint is malicious, frivolous, or the prosecution is an abuse of process, which is rare in serious offences.
If inherent powers are exercised to quash such cases without proper cause, it sets a dangerous precedent.
Summary
| Aspect | Principle |
|---|---|
| Nature of Inherent Powers | To prevent abuse of process, exercised sparingly |
| Heinous Offences | Serious crimes affecting society, require strict scrutiny |
| Compromise in Rape Cases | Not accepted due to public interest and victim protection |
| Judicial Approach | Protect victim’s rights, uphold rule of law, discourage misuse |
RELATED Blog
0 comments