False Rape Complaints Not Only Puts Unnecessary Load On Overflowing Dockets But Causes Injustice To Actual Victims: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that false rape complaints not only puts unnecessary load on the overflowing dockets but also causes grave injustice to actual rape victims. “Every false complaint contributes to not just unnecessary load on the overflowing dockets, but also to the artifacts of crime, generating an impression in the society about falsity even of genuine complaints,...
The Delhi High Court has observed that false rape complaints not only puts unnecessary load on the overflowing dockets but also causes grave injustice to actual rape victims.
“Every false complaint contributes to not just unnecessary load on the overflowing dockets, but also to the artifacts of crime, generating an impression in the society about falsity even of genuine complaints, thereby causing grave injustice to actual rape victims,” Justice Girish Kathpalia observed.
The Court said that quashing the criminal proceedings in such situations would be tantamount to the High Court giving seal of approval to such abuse of process of criminal justice machinery by the complainant.
The Court made the observations while refusing to quash an FIR filed by a married woman against her neighbour accusing him of repeatedly raping under force and threats, beating her and forcing her to participate in unnatural sex.
It was also alleged that she was forced to carry out abortion under the threat of circulating her nude photographs and videos on social media.
The petition was filed seeking quashing of the FIR on the ground that the complainant and the accused married each other after obtaining divorce.
It was submitted that since admittedly the prosecutrix was a married lady when she came in contact with the accused, there was no scope for him to make any false promise of marriage. It was also contended that there was no possibility of conviction, since the prosecutrix would not support prosecution during trial.
The prosecution opposed the plea contending that prosecutrix had consented to the petition under pressure. It was argued that such heinous offences, if allowed to be forgiven, would leave a very bad precedent and encourage the potential wrong doers.
Dismissing the plea, the Court said that was nobody's case that the complaint lodged by the prosecutrix contained false allegations and if that was so, why should she be allowed to get away with lodging false complaint that led to initiation of criminal justice machinery.
The Court added that if the complaint lodged by the prosecutrix contained truth, would it be justified to push her into the matrimonial fold of her tormentor, thereby granting premium to the rapist?
“Should it not be the bounden duty of the State to ensure food, clothing and shelter to such victim, so that she does not helplessly surrender into the matrimony offered by her rapist in order to escape clutches of law,” the Court said.
It added that the court, exercising inherent powers on such issues, must strike delicate balance between abovementioned rival possibilities and that it is necessary to take the complaint through full dress trial.
Justice Kathpalia said that there were few possibilities in the case- first, either the allegations were false or they were truthful and under fear of being maligned by circulation of her nude pictures and videos, the prosecutrix had married the accused and agreed to support the petition; second, her allegations were truthful, she had genuinely forgiven the accused.
The Court said that if the allegations were false, strict action must be taken against prosecutrix but if the allegations were truthful, it would have to be ascertained as to whether she had voluntarily forgiven the accused or had done so under fear of being maligned.
Refusing to quash the FIR, the Court said that the trend gradually setting in across the society to lodge false complaints with impunity and thereafter retract, needs to be checked.
“On the other hand, if the complaint lodged by the prosecutrix respondent no.2, which led to registration of FIR and the consequent proceedings is truthful, instead of extending premium to a rapist and a molester by pushing the helpless rape victim into his matrimony, it would be the duty of the State to ensure her a dignified life by providing her food, shelter and clothing,” the Court said.
Title: SHAFEEQ AHMAD & ORS v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 497