Allahabad High Court: Orders FIR Against Woman For False POCSO FIR

• The Allahabad High Court directed police to register a criminal case against a woman for filing a false rape complaint against her brother.
• The woman allegedly used her minor daughter to accuse her brother of rape under the POCSO Act.
• During the trial, the daughter stated her uncle only scolded her, and both she and her mother became hostile witnesses.
• The mother, the first informant, admitted to lodging a false case against her brother before the trial court.
• The court ordered the Meerut Senior Superintendent of Police to file an FIR against the mother under Section 22 of the POCSO Act for providing false information.

This ruling by the Allahabad High Court establishes a clear precedent for legal action, including the registration of an FIR, against individuals who file false complaints under the POCSO Act, particularly under Section 22.

The Allahabad High Court has issued a directive for the registration of a criminal case against a woman who allegedly orchestrated a false rape accusation against her own brother, utilizing her minor daughter in the process. This significant ruling, delivered by Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, came as the court granted bail to the accused individual, who had been facing charges under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, following an investigation by Meerut police.

The initial prosecution claims asserted that the minor's maternal uncle had subjected her to repeated sexual assault. However, the veracity of these allegations began to unravel during the course of the trial. The High Court's decision underscores a firm stance against the misuse of serious legal provisions designed to protect vulnerable individuals.

Crucially, the victim, who is the daughter of the complainant, provided testimony before the trial court that contradicted the grave accusations. She stated that her uncle had merely reprimanded her for using a mobile phone, rather than committing any sexual offense. This pivotal statement directly challenged the foundation of the prosecution's case.

Further compounding the situation, both the minor victim and her mother, who was the first informant (P.W.-2), failed to substantiate the prosecution's narrative during the trial proceedings. Consequently, both were declared hostile witnesses. These critical developments were brought to the High Court's attention during the hearing of the accused's application for bail, revealing the true nature of the complaint.

Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, after reviewing the statements of the witnesses, particularly P.W.-1 and P.W.-2, concluded that the first informant (P.W.-2) had indeed filed a false case against the applicant. This fact was explicitly acknowledged by the mother in her own statement before the trial court. Consequently, the court issued a clear instruction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Meerut, to register a First Information Report (FIR) against P.W.-2 for initiating a false case.

This directive is specifically grounded in Section 22 of the POCSO Act, which addresses the issue of false information provided under the Act. The order, passed on October 28, not only granted bail to the falsely accused brother but also established a clear legal pathway for accountability against those who misuse the protective framework of the POCSO Act.

This ruling by the Allahabad High Court establishes a clear precedent for legal action, including the registration of an FIR, against individuals who file false complaints under the POCSO Act, particularly under Section 22. It highlights the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that laws designed to protect children are not exploited for malicious purposes, such as settling personal scores or fabricating charges.

The decision sends a strong message regarding the severe legal repercussions for making false accusations, especially in sensitive cases involving child protection. It underscores the importance of truthful testimony and the legal risks associated with malicious prosecution or false reporting under the POCSO Act, reinforcing the principle that justice must prevail for both victims and the falsely accused.

This ruling establishes a clear precedent for legal action, including the registration of an FIR, against individuals who file false complaints under the POCSO Act, particularly under Section 22. Lawyers should be aware of this when advising clients accused under POCSO or when assessing the credibility and potential repercussions of such complaints, as it underscores the legal risks associated with malicious prosecution or false reporting.

Source: Original reporting via Live Law