Bench consist of Sathasivam, Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi clearly held that in rape cases compromise entered between parties should not been construed as leading factor based on which lesser punishment can be awarded.

Shimbhu and Anr v State of Haryana (27th august 2013) 

Bench consist of Sathasivam, Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi clearly held that in rape cases compromise entered between parties should not been construed as leading factor based on which lesser punishment can be awarded.

In the instatnt case accused persons 1 and 2 raped prosecutrix at knife point and threatened her with dire consequences. Trial court convicted and sentenced accused. High court also confirmed the sentence. Before the Supreme Court the issue was Whether appellants have made out case for imposition of lesser sentence than 10 years. The Apex Court Held that compromise entered between parties should not be construed as leading factor based on which lesser punishment should be awarded - Rape was non-compoundable offence and it was offence against society and was not matter to be left for parties to compromise and settle. Since Court should not always be assured that consent given by victim in compromising case was genuine consent, there was every chance that she might have been pressurized by accused or trauma undergone by her all years might have compelled her to opt for compromise. Some times Accused might use all his influence to pressurize her for compromise. So, in interest of justice and to avoid unnecessary pressure/harassment to victim, it would not be safe in considering compromise arrived at between parties in rape cases to be ground for Court to exercise discretionary power under proviso of s. 376(2) of IPC - Hence, request for reduction of sentence was rejected