In Brief
A teacher was accused of sexually assaulting a teenage student, triggering an FIR under laws protecting children from sexual offences. The accused later compromised with the victim's father, and the High Court quashed the FIR based on this settlement. Local residents challenged this, arguing that sexual offences against children concern society and cannot be simply compromised away. The Supreme Court held that third parties can seek relief under Article 136 when public interest is affected and the State fails to act. It ruled that heinous offences—especially those targeting vulnerable children in educational settings—cannot be quashed merely through compromise, as they harm society and undermine the protective legislation's purpose. The Court set aside the High Court's order and directed the investigation and proceedings to continue.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.