The Allahabad High Court recently observed that genuine cases of sexual offences are becoming an exception and the general rule is false implication of men in such cases.
A single-judge bench of Justice Siddharth said the implication in a case of sexual offence is a sure shot way of punishment before trial, as bails are normally not granted easily and early.
“In cases where the implication is made under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Act, the situation becomes worse. Incarceration of accused in jail for few months or for years is certain,” stressed the court.
The Court added that as “the training of judicial officers in their training institute is still in line with the old concept of bail in cases of sexual offences, treating of all wild allegations in the first information report (FIR) as gospel truth, without keeping an eye on the ground realities, is causing a lot of injustice”.
The Court further highlighted that the ground reality is that whenever an offence takes place, the munshi/head clerk of the police station or the lawyer enquires whether the informant side has enmity with someone or with whom it wants to settle a score and then implicates all those not connected to the offence being complained about.
Further, regarding the hesitance of the courts at district level in granting bail in such matters, the court opined that as the roles of the accused are so meticulously shown in the FIR, even the most experienced of the judges falter in fear of disciplinary proceedings by the higher courts.
“Whether allegations are prima facie credible or are proved or not is not very relevant at their level. They just get rid themselves of such cases by refusing to grant relief, which is also part of their training at the very threshold of joining of their service in their training institute,” underscored the court.
The Court said as soon as the honest statement of the complainant/informant is recorded in writing by the officer-in-charge of the police station soon after the incident and the role of expert (lawyer or munshi/head clerk of police station) gets excluded in lodging of report, cases of false implication will come down.
The observations were made in a bail application filed by a man accused under Sections 363, 366, 376, 323, 504, 506, 354, 354-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and 3/4 POCSO Act.
The allegations against the man were that he abducted a minor girl and committed rape.
The girl claimed that when she was pursuing her B.Sc. course, she entered into a physical relationship with the accused on a false promise of marriage.
As per the prosecution, though a court marriage had taken place between the couple, after repeated rapes by the accused and torture by his family members, the accused left the girl back to her family.
The high court found that the marriage of the accused and the victim had indeed been registered and no divorce, dissolution of marriage or judicial separation of couple through court had taken place.
Therefore, while highlighting that the girl had admitted that she had entered physical relationships with the accused without any element of coercion before and after her court marriage, the court held that it appeared the FIR was meticulously drafted by an expert.
The Court allowed the accused’s bail plea.
Comments
0 comment