PIL Seeks Action Against Fake Rape, SC/ST Cases; Supreme Court Issues Notice
The Supreme Court issued notice on a PIL alleging rampant misuse of criminal law through fabricated FIRs and false complaints, and sought responses within four weeks
Supreme Court bench led by CJI Surya Kant hearing a PIL seeking safeguards against registration of false criminal cases
The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice on a writ petition seeking measures to curb the alleged misuse of criminal law through the filing of false cases based on fabricated information.
The bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant took up the Public Interest Litigation filed by Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, who contended that fake criminal complaints, including serious charges such as rape and offences under the SC/ST Act, are being used as tools of harassment and coercion.
Upadhyay submitted that individuals are often falsely implicated in grave offences due to personal enmity or local disputes. Referring to specific instances, he claimed that a religious preacher was forced into hiding after a “fake rape case” was allegedly lodged against him. He also cited the case of former ISRO scientist Nambi Narayanan, who was exonerated years after being implicated in an espionage case, to underscore the long-lasting impact of wrongful prosecution.
Arguing that the judiciary is burdened more by fabricated cases than genuine grievances, Upadhyay said that local land disputes frequently escalate into criminal prosecutions under stringent penal provisions. “A civil dispute becomes a criminal case,” he submitted, adding that the social fabric of rural India is being disturbed by the alleged misuse of criminal law.
During the hearing, CJI Surya Kant observed that the problem intensifies when false complaints are lodged without the knowledge of the de facto complainant. He noted instances where complaints are allegedly filed using forged signatures, leaving the supposed complainant unaware that proceedings have been initiated in their name.
The CJI referred to a case where a woman approached the Court stating that a political leader named in her complaint was not involved, raising concerns about the role of “money power or muscle power” in influencing criminal proceedings.
Addressing broader concerns, the CJI remarked that while the Court may be accused of “gagging” if it intervenes, the judiciary cannot be deterred from addressing systemic abuse. He stressed the need to build an informed and sensitised society where citizens understand not only their own fundamental rights but also those of others. The principle of fraternity, he observed, must be cultivated to prevent misuse of legal processes.
The Bench issued notice in the matter and directed that it be listed for further consideration after four weeks.
The petitioner, Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay has urged the Court to direct authorities to install prominent “Display Boards” at all police stations, tehsil and district court premises, panchayat bhawans, municipal offices and educational institutions, clearly spelling out the statutory provisions and punishments for false complaints, false charges, false statements, false information and false evidence. The plea contends that such disclosures are necessary to safeguard the right to life, personal liberty, dignity and reputation of innocent citizens under Article 21.
The PIL filed through AoR Ashwani Kumar Dubey also seeks directions requiring police and other authorities to inform complainants, before accepting any complaint, about the penal consequences of filing false or malicious cases. According to the petitioner, this step is essential to secure the freedom of speech and expression of innocent citizens, who otherwise live under constant fear of misuse of the criminal process.
In addition, the plea calls for a mandatory undertaking or affidavit from complainants affirming that the averments made in the complaint, statements, information, evidence and charges are true and correct. The petitioner argues that such an undertaking would act as a minimal safeguard to deter false complaints and help control the flood of frivolous cases choking the justice system.
While acknowledging that Chapter XIV of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 contains penal provisions dealing with false information and evidence, the petitioner argues that the absence of any administrative or preventive framework has rendered these provisions largely inoperative. Penal laws existing only on paper, without mechanisms to operationalise them, amount to arbitrariness by State inaction, the plea submits.
Invoking Article 14, the PIL argues that the State’s failure to uniformly inform complainants of legal consequences or to create safeguards against abuse results in unequal application of criminal law and allows its selective weaponisation. Such deliberate inaction, it is contended, defeats the constitutional guarantee of equality before law and fair administration of justice.
Emphasising Article 21, the plea states that false complaints and malicious prosecutions convert the criminal process itself into punishment, leading to loss of liberty, social stigma, mental trauma and irreversible damage to reputation even in cases ending in acquittal. The petitioner highlights that the judiciary is already overburdened due to false complaints and fabricated cases, yet neither the Centre nor the States have taken adequate steps to control these “menaces”.
Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Anr.
Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi
Hearing Date: February 26, 2026