On August 10, the Allahabad High Court observed that in “maximum cases” the women are filing false cases against innocent persons to ruin their image in society and to take money from the state, using the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) (SC/ST) Act as a weapon to grab money.
“Before parting with the case, it would be appropriate to observe that in the society, there are certain false FIR under the POCSO as well as SC/ST Act is lodged against innocent persons ruined their image in the society just for taking money from the State. It is very unfortunate that now a days, in maximum cases the women is using it as a weapon just to grab money, which should be stopped,” Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav said.
The court further said that looking at the rampant increase of crimes of sexual violence, it is “high time” that the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Union of India become sensitive to the grave issue.
The court directed that in case the FIR is found to be false, then criminal proceedings are initiated against the victim u/s 344 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) after conducting an inquiry. The court further directed that in case any money is given by the State to the victim, then the same shall be recovered from the victim.
Justice SK Yadav was hearing accused Ajay Yadav’s anticipatory bail application moved before the court in relation to Case Crime No 49 of 2019. The case against the accused has been registered u/s 376 (Punishment for Rape), 313 (Causing miscarriage without woman’s consent), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and u/s 3, 4 of the POCSO Act.
The accused’s counsel argued that the victim had filed the case to harass the accused on “false and fabricated ground” and that no such incident had taken place. The counsel argued that while the victim claimed in the FIR that the alleged incident took place in 2011, the FIR was lodged in 2019 without a plausible explanation for the delay. The counsel further pointed out that the Allahabad High Court has already granted anticipatory bail to co-accused Dayalu Yadav on April 11, 2023.
Justice SK Yadav, on perusal of the record, said that there are material contradictions in the victim’s statement recorded u/s 161 and 164 of the CrPC. The court said that while in the FIR the victim said that the accused raped her in 2012, whereas in her statement u/s 161 of the CrPC, the victim said that the accused raped her in 2013.
The court directed that the accused Ajay Yadav is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two sureties. The court directed that the accused shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer during the investigation and report to the IO when required.
The court directed that the accused shall not, either directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the case to dissuade such person from disclosing the facts before the court or to any police officer. The court also directed that the accused surrender his passport to the concerned court and that he shall not leave the country during the pendency of the case.
The court directed that the accused should file an undertaking that he shall not seek adjournment on dates fixed for evidence or when witnesses are present before the court.
“In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant,” the court said.
Notably, in 2022, Justice SK Yadav granted bail to a man accused of killing his wife as she could not prepare food due to the non-availability of vegetables. The accused husband had allegedly lost his temper and started beating the victim and poured kerosene oil upon her and burned her.
“Perusal of dying declaration of the deceased clearly shows that on the date of alleged incident i.e. on 25.07.2013 in noon, when the deceased could not prepare the food due to non availability of vegetable for which her husband lost his temper and started beating and poured kerosene oil upon her and burned. It means that there was no premeditation for the applicant to commit such offence as alleged against him,” Justice SK Yadav said.
The complainant, the deceased victim’s father, alleged that while sufficient dowry was given for the marriage, the accused and his family members were not happy with it. The complainant alleged that when the victim went to her matrimonial home, she was tortured and harassed by the accused and his family members. The complainant had alleged that the accused and his family members were pressurising the victim to bring Rs 2 lakhs from her family and that they threatened to kill her by burning her if she did not fulfil the demand.
The complainant alleged that on July 25, 2013, he received a telephonic call from the victim’s marital home that his daughter had been burned by pouring kerosene oil by her husband and his family members. The complainant and his family members rushed to the hospital where they saw her struggling for her life.
The complainant had submitted before the court that while struggling for her life, the victim informed her father that the accused and his family members burned her by pouring kerosene oil. The victim struggled for her life for 8 days before she died on August 1, 2013, and the cause of death due to septic shock.
