Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that at present genuine cases of sexual offences are an exception and the general rule is of false implication of men in such cases.

The single judge bench of Justice Siddharth said that implication in 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 POCSO Act, the situation becomes worse. Incarceration of accused in jail for few months or for years is certain," stressed the court.

Court added that since the training of judicial officers in their training institute is still in line with the old concept of bail in cases of sexual offences, the treating of all the wild allegations in FIR as gospel truth without keeping an eye on the ground realities is causing lots of injustice.

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 the offence being complained.

Further, regarding the hesitance of the courts at district level in granting bail in such matters, court opined that since 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. 

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) get 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 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act.

The allegations against the man were that he abducted a minor girl and committed rape upon her. 

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 victim had admitted that she had entered physical relationships with the accused without any element of coercion before and after her court marriage, court held that it appeared the FIR was meticulously drafted by an expert. 

In view of the same, court allowed the accused's bail plea. 

Case Title: Vivek Kumar Maurya v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others