The Court considered the case and said that an FIR in a serious case like this cannot be quashed.
“This Court is of the opinion that justice in a criminal trial, particularly in a case such as the present one, serves not only as a serious example and deterrent to the accused but also as a lesson to the community as a whole.
Neither the accused nor the complainant can be allowed to manipulate the criminal justice system or misuse State and judicial resources to serve their own ends.
Therefore, even if the parties have reached a compromise, they cannot demand the quashing of an FIR as a matter of right.”Justice Sharma added that the trial court must decide the case on its merits, and examine the facts in light of natural justice for both the complainant and the accused, keeping in mind the broader implications for the community and the criminal justice system.
The Court considered the case and said that an FIR in a serious case like this cannot be quashed.
“This Court is of the opinion that justice in a criminal trial, particularly in a case such as the present one, serves not only as a serious example and deterrent to the accused but also as a lesson to the community as a whole. Neither the accused nor the complainant can be allowed to manipulate the criminal justice system or misuse State and judicial resources to serve their own ends. Therefore, even if the parties have reached a compromise, they cannot demand the quashing of an FIR as a matter of right.”
Justice Sharma added that the trial court must decide the case on its merits, and examine the facts in light of natural justice for both the complainant and the accused, keeping in mind the broader implications for the community and the criminal justice system.
