Top
News Updates

Delhi HC Directs Trial Court To Proceed Against Prosecutrix Who Filed False Gang-Rape Complaint [Read Judgment]

Apoorva Mandhani
8 Aug 2017 4:15 AM GMT
Delhi HC Directs Trial Court To Proceed Against Prosecutrix Who Filed False Gang-Rape Complaint [Read Judgment]
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Delhi High Court recently directed the Trial Court to proceed against a prosecutrix for leveling false allegations of gang-rape against two Delhi-based doctors.

While the Court acknowledged that “ordinarily no woman would falsely implicate someone in a rape case owing to social stigma attached to the offence”, it noted that it has come across false rape charges “when someone tutored a gullible daughter or a disgruntled employee levelled false allegations to seek vengeance”.

“From the aforegoing, it is clear that the Courts must not be blind to the rights of the accused. A false accusation of rape may be as damning to an accused as to a victim of rape. The accused may be shunned in the society and by his own family, spouse and children for no fault of his own only because one woman has levelled false allegations of rape in pursuance of her evil design,” the Bench comprising Justice G.S. Sistani and Justice A.K. Chawla further observed.

The complainant had alleged that her services as an Administrative Assistant (Field) at a micronutrient research centre were terminated in March, 2013, and that she was raped when both the doctors called her on the pretext of giving back the job.

The Court was now hearing an Appeal filed by the State under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. challenging an order of the Trial Court which had acquitted the two doctors.

Upholding the impugned order, the High Court concluded that the complainant’s testimony was contradictory on vital aspects, and that “whole criminal machinery was put in force just to extract revenge from the respondents”. It further took into consideration the delay of 22 days in registration of the FIR, and observed that such delay was of “great importance” as it raised a doubt on the entire prosecution case.

Thereafter, observing that it was prima facie satisfied that there was “a conscious and deliberate effort to misuse the process of law to initiate false proceedings” against the Respondents, it directed the Trial Court to proceed against the complainant and Mr. Ram Pravesh for giving false evidence to the Court under Section 340 of the Cr.P.C.

Read the Judgment Here

Next Story