‘Woman’s body her temple’: Madhya Pradesh High Court refuses to quash rape case despite survivor’s ‘compromise’
Madhya Pradesh High Court Latest News: The Madhya Pradesh High Court was hearing a petition filed by a rape and POCSO accused man for quashing of an FIR based on settlement with the survivor.
6 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Feb 14, 2026 10:33 AM IST
Madhya Pradesh High Court News: The offence of rape fall in the category of “serious and heinous” category and is crime against the society. (Image generated using AI)
Madhya Pradesh High Court News: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to quash a rape case on the basis of a compromise between the accused and the survivor, observing that these are crimes against the body of a woman which is her own temple and dismissed a plea seeking settlement in the matter.
Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke was hearing a petition filed by a rape and POCSO accused man for quashing of an FIR based on settlement with the survivor.
“In a case of rape or attempt of rape, the conception of compromise under no circumstances can really be thought of. These are crimes against the body of a woman which is her own temple. These are offences which suffocate the breath of life and sully the reputation,” the court said on February 11 referring to its own verdict.
These offences strike at the bodily integrity and dignity of a woman and have far-reaching societal implications, said the Madhya Pradesh High Court. (Image enhanced using AI)
Petition dismissed
The high court dismissed the petition and allowed the criminal trial to proceed in accordance with law .
“No order as to costs,” the court directed, formally closing the plea.
The accused approached the high court seeking quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings on the ground that the parties had entered into an amicable compromise.
In compliance with an earlier direction dated September 13, 2024, the compromise was verified by the principal registrar, who recorded statements of both the survivor and the accused and reported that the settlement was voluntary and without coercion.
However, the state opposed the plea, arguing that rape is a heinous and non-compoundable offence with deep societal ramifications.
The court also cautioned against the frequent defence tactic of offering marriage as a ground for leniency.
Sometimes solace is given that the perpetrator of the crime has acceded to enter into wedlock with her which is nothing but putting pressure in an adroit manner.
The bench added that courts must remain “absolutely away from this subterfuge” .
Calling any liberal approach in such cases a “spectacular error,” the court said compromise in rape cases would amount to undermining a woman’s honour and dignity.
The court clarified that although Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 BNSS) empowers high courts to quash proceedings to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process, such power cannot override the gravity of serious offences.
Section 482 of the CrPC recognises the inherent powers of the high court to pass orders necessary to prevent abuse of the process of any court, give effect to CrPC orders, or secure the ends of justice.
It is a saving clause for exercising discretionary power, used for quashing FIRs or proceedings, generally when no other remedy is available.
It concluded that the gravity and nature of the allegations disentitled the petitioner from seeking quashing merely on the basis of settlement between the parties.
Vineet Upadhyay is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express, where he leads specialized coverage of the Indian judicial system.
Expertise
Specialized Legal Authority: Vineet has spent the better part of his career analyzing the intricacies of the law. His expertise lies in "demystifying" judgments from the Supreme Court of India, various High Courts, and District Courts. His reporting covers a vast spectrum of legal issues, including:
Constitutional & Civil Rights: Reporting on landmark rulings regarding privacy, equality, and state accountability.
Criminal Justice & Enforcement: Detailed coverage of high-profile cases involving the Enforcement Directorate (ED), NIA, and POCSO matters.
Consumer Rights & Environmental Law: Authoritative pieces on medical negligence compensation, environmental protection (such as the "living person" status of rivers), and labor rights.
Over a Decade of Professional Experience: Prior to joining The Indian Express, he served as a Principal Correspondent/Legal Reporter for The Times of India and held significant roles at The New Indian Express. His tenure has seen him report from critical legal hubs, including Delhi and Uttarakhand. ... Read More