"Can one’s poverty be a good ground for making false allegations against an innocent person?" the Court asked.

A bench consisting of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray directed the trial court to dismiss the case against the three accused.

 

Significantly, the High Court also instructed the trial court to investigate whether the woman and her daughter could face legal consequences for filing a false complaint and fabricating evidence.

 

"As a result of such an act, three innocent persons being the petitioners herein, have spent almost one year behind the bar, and this fact, therefore, should also be taken into account by the Learned Judge. After enquiry, if the Learned Judge, Special POCSO Court, Berhampore, Murshidabad, finds that the defacto-complainant and/or her daughter (if major) are responsible for fabrication of false evidence under Section 192 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ... he shall initiate criminal proceedings against them," the Court said in its September 24 order.

 

The woman had claimed that the three men had raped her minor daughter. The accused were booked for rape under the Indian Penal Code and sexual assault under the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POSCO Act). The accused persons had languished in judicial custody for nearly a year.

 

During a bail hearing, the woman acknowledged that she had filed a false case against the accused due to political pressure. The High Court regarded this admission with gravity. Consequently, in addition to granting bail to the accused, the Court initiated a suo motu case, requiring the woman to justify why she should not face prosecution for her false allegations.

 

The woman extended an unconditional apology, stating that the false complaint was filed under significant pressure from local political leaders. She explained that her husband had been bedridden since 2017 due to a broken spinal cord, resulting in their limited income. The family relied heavily on state-sponsored grants from various social schemes. She also mentioned that at the end of July 2023, several local political leaders had approached her, urging her to fabricate a false story.

 

The Court was informed that these political leaders had switched their allegiance from the ruling party to the opposition and had promised the woman that her family would be included in additional social schemes and receive increased financial aid if she agreed to file a false case.

 

Her counsel urged the Court to take a lenient view by referring to a 2018 poem titled "A Tea Seller and a Judge," written by Advocate Bharat Chugh, who was then serving as a railway magistrate.

The poem narrates the tale of a young tea seller who, driven by dire poverty, contravened the Indian Railway Act, 1989, while selling tea in trains and at railway stations. Ultimately, the magistrate acquitted the boy, taking into account the circumstances that prompted his actions.

However, the High Court noted that no innocent individuals were harmed as a result of the tea seller's case.

"He (tea seller) violated the provisions of law due to his poverty. But, we must reiterate that poverty cannot be a ground for lodging false complaints against innocent persons. The contention of the defacto-complainant as such does not impress us," the Court said.

The Court also discovered that the woman's daughter may not have been a minor when the rape case was filed, as it was revealed that she had been married and divorced twice. The Court observed that while the POCSO Act typically protects children, even in instances of misleading complaints, this protective measure would not extend immunity to the daughter in this particular case.