Cyber Crimes Affect Society At Large, Can't Be Quashed Solely Based On Compromise Between Parties: Rajasthan High Court
Rajasthan High Court held that cyber crimes are not merely disputes between private individual but affect digital ecosystem and public confidence in electronic transactions. Hence, quashing such offences solely based on compromise between the parties shall defeat the objective of the legislation enacted to curb cyber crimes. In the present matter, the FIR alleged offences of cheating...
Rajasthan High Court held that cyber crimes are not merely disputes between private individual but affect digital ecosystem and public confidence in electronic transactions.
Hence, quashing such offences solely based on compromise between the parties shall defeat the objective of the legislation enacted to curb cyber crimes.
In the present matter, the FIR alleged offences of cheating and impersonation by the petitioner through electronic means, posing as police officials, and coercing complainant through phone calls to transfer substantial amounts of money by threatening criminal action.
The bench of Justice Baljinder Singh Sandhu held that such offences were capable of affecting large number of unsuspecting persons who relied on digital platforms and electronic communication for financial and commercial transactions. Hence, the offence was not just a private dispute but entered a realm of public interest.
"Cyber crimes are therefore not merely disputes between private individuals but are offences which affect the digital ecosystem and public confidence in electronic transactions. Therefore, permitting quashing of such offences solely on the basis of compromise between the parties would defeat the purpose and object of the legislation enacted to curb cyber crimes".
The petitioner, accused of the above-mentioned offence under IPC as well as the Information Technology Act, had filed for a quashing petition on the grounds of compromise reached between the parties.
This was opposed by the State which argued that cyber offences were not merely private in nature, but affected public confidence in digital systems and electronic transactions.
After hearing the contentions, the Court highlighted that it had inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings where the dispute was private in nature. However, the power had to be exercised with caution and did not extend to cases involving serious offences having wider societal impact.
Reference was made to the Supreme Court case of Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat to hold that while quashing, High Court had to examine nature and gravity of offence, and economic offences affecting financial well being of the State could not be treated as mere private disputes.
The Court also affirmed that it was a settled position of law that offences of serious nature that had wide societal impact, could not be quashed merely on account of a compromise reached between the parties.
In this background, the Court considered the alleged offence in the present matter and held that, “Offences of this nature involve misuse of digital identity and electronic platforms and have far-reaching implications beyond the immediate parties involved, endangering the digital ecosystem and undermining public confidence in electronic transactions. Such acts, by their very nature, transcend private disputes and assume the character of offences impacting society at large.”
Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.
Title: Mohammad Rahil Belim v State of Rajasthan, and other connected petition
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 176