The Allahabad High Court while granting the anticipatory bail application observed that in the society, there are certain false FIR under the POCSO as well as SC/ST Act is lodged against innocent persons ruined their image in the society just for taking money from the State. It is very unfortunate that now a days, in maximum cases the women is using it as a weapon just to grab money, which should be stopped.
A Single Bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application filed by Ajay Yadav.
The anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C) has been moved seeking bail in Case under Sections 376, 313, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, Police Station Phoolpur, District Azamgarh.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case just to harass the applicant in fact no such incident has taken place as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. As per allegation, the applicant has committed rape upon the victim in the year 2011.
He further submitted that the incident is alleged to have taken place in the year 2011 whereas the impugned FIR has been lodged on 11.03.2019 i.e about 8 years of the alleged incident but there is no plausible explanation regarding huge delay.
He also submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C has stated that the applicant has made physical relation with her. The victim herself has admitted that she has made physical relation with the applicant meaning thereby the victim is a consenting party.
Counsel for the applicant said that the victim was medically examined on 28.03.2019 in which the victim was found above 18 years and as per supplementary medical report, no spermatozoa was seen.
He further said that in the alleged incident, the applicant and his father have been implicated on false and fabricated grounds. The co accused Dayalu Yadav has already been granted anticipatory bail by the Court vide order dated 11.04.2023 passed in Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application.
Prime facie no alleged offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant has no previous criminal history. He also submitted that the applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate with the trial.
A.G.A as well as counsel for the informant/victim have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.
“Perusal of record shows that there are material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC. As per version of the FIR, it has been mentioned that the applicant made physical relation with the victim in the year 2012 whereas in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C the victim has stated that the applicant made physical relation in the year 2013.
Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98″, the Court observed.
“In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant-Ajay Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court”, the Court ordered.
Looking to the rampant and daily increasing prevalence of such type of crimes of sexual violence, I think that it is high time that the State of UP and even the Union of India should become sensitive to this grave issue, the Court said.
“Under the circumstances, it is directed that in case it is found that the FIR lodged by the victim is false, then criminal proceedings under Section 344 CrPC against the victim shall be initiated after conducting inquiry. It is also directed that in case any money is given by the State to the victim, the same shall also be recovered from the victim”, the order reads.