MADRAS HC ON FALSE SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE BY WIFE

MADRAS HC ON FALSE SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE BY WIFE

VIDHI GUPTA 

BACKGROUND

In order to effectively address the heinous crimes of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children through less ambiguous and more stringent legal provisions, the Ministry of Women and Child Development championed the introduction of the PROTECTION OF CHILD FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES (POCSO) Act, 2012.

Section 6 of POCSO states that Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault – not less than ten years which may extend to imprisonment for life and fine.

Section 482 of Cr.P.C. states that saving of inherent of High Court. Nothing in this code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the high court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.

Section 164 of Cr.P.C states that subsection (1) authorizes the Magistrate to record the statement of a person or his confession, no matter whether he possess jurisdiction in the case.

Section 22 of POCSO states that whoever, not behind a child, makes a false complaint or provides false information against a child, knowing it to be false, thereby victimizing such child in any of the offences under this act.

This is one of those unfortunate cases where the wife has resorted to giving a complaint against her husband alleging that he had committed sexual assault against their daughter who is aged about 11 years.

KEY ISSUE (MADRAS HC ON FALSE SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE BY WIFE)

The complainant, C. Shakunthala, had filed a malafide proceedings under section 6 of POCSO provision, accusing her husband, N. Chandramohan, of sexually assaulting the victim, their daughter. She also alleged that the ill-acts of the accused rendered the victim pregnant and she had to undergo abortion procedure.

Subsequently, the Madras court granted anticipatory bail to the accused, observing that the complaint in question was frivolous.

Thereafter, the accused filed the present Criminal Original Petition titled “N. Chandramahon v. State & Anr.”, before the high court under section 482 of CrPC, pleading the court to quash the FIR lodged against him.

It was alleged by the accused that there was a dispute between him and the complainant and the present false FIR was filed by her in act of vengeance as the complainant wanted to get her daughter’s custody as they were living separately.

In this circumstance, the court enquired the victim girl who denied all the allegations that were put on her father by her mother. Further, she stated that she had never undergone any sort of treatment at any hospital for aborting the child as alleged by her mother. Her stand was consistent with her statement under Section 164 of CrPC.

ALSO READ: P. Chidambaram’s INX media scam

CONCLUSION

MADRAS HC ON FALSE SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE BY WIFE

The Madras High Court took the stern view against a complainant who had initiated the malafide proceedings under Section 6 of the PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENSES Act, 2012 against her husband.

Accordingly, Justice N. Anand Venkatesh concluded that the complainant had lodged a false complaint with an intentional motive to threaten the accused. The court also said that this case had shocked the conscience of this court and this is unbelievable that the mother just for the sake of her daughter’s custody could have gone to this extent where she had found no other alternative than accusing her own husband of having physical contact with her daughter.

The court decided that the lady should be made to suffer the consequences for having given a false complaint against her husband at the cost of her own daughter. The respondent police were ordered to proceed with Section 22 of POCSO act for having given a false complaint and tale action against her in accordance with the law.  

ALSO READ: Chopper Scam: Ratul Puri Arrested in Central Bank Fraud Case.