Women misusing POCSO, SC/ST Act: Allahabad HC
The judge, in his order dated August 10, said, “I think it is high time that the state and even the Union of India, should become sensitive to this grave issue.”
Published: 13th August 2023 09:29 AM | Last Updated: 13th August 2023 09:29 AM | A+A A-
Allahabad HC. (File photo)
LUCKNOW: The Allahabad High Court has taken a strong exception on the rising instances of fake complaints and misuse of legal provisions under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Act as well as the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, “to grab money” from the state.
While granting bail to a man accused of committing sexual offences, Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav observed, “...There are certain instances of false FIRs (first information report) under the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act lodged against innocent persons... It is very unfortunate that nowadays, in maximum cases, women are using it as a weapon just to grab money, which should be stopped.”
Applicant Ajay Yadav had sought anticipatory bail in connection with a case that included allegations of offences under Sections 376 (rape), 313, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act. The alleged incident took place in Azamgarh district of Uttar Pradesh in 2011.
The judge, in his order dated August 10, said, “I think it is high time that the state and even the Union of India, should become sensitive to this grave issue.”
The court observed that if it was found that the complaint lodged by a victim was false, then criminal proceedings under the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) shall be initiated against the complainant after inquiry.
The judge also directed that any financial compensation given by the state to the complainant should be recovered in case the complaint was found to be frivolous. The court further urged authorities to address this issue and ensure that the genuine victims of sexual offences get justice.
Appearing on behalf of the applicant, his counsel argued that he had been falsely implicated and that the incident never took place as alleged in the impugned FIR.
The applicant’s counsel further highlighted certain inconsistencies in the victim’s statements and pointed out that the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC indicated a level of “consent” to the physical relationship.
