Mom forced me to frame papa on rape charge’
NEW DELHI: Fact can, indeed, turn out to be stranger than fiction. Check out this real-life story.
A man was sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment by a lower court for raping his daughter. The high court found holes in the prosecution story and acquitted him.
The case moved to the Supreme Court and the apex court said such a crime couldn’t go unpunished, awarding the accused a life term.
And now the daughter, on whose complaint the father is in prison, has confessed in a sworn affidavit that her dad was innocent.
She said she had framed him at the instance of her mother whose relationship with her father was strained. This bizarre casesenior lawyers say they’ve not heard of a more weird twist to a casehas raised several questions.
What happens to the punishment given by the SC now that its very basis has been dissolved? Will the daughter and the mother now be punished for misleading the court and tormenting the man?
How common is abuse of the law in shocking cases like rape and dowry? How rigorous is police investigation into such complaints? The story is that of Asha Ram, about whose alleged crime an anguished Supreme Court had expressed outrage, saying he had destroyed “one of the most sacred relations”.
Only last week it had awarded him a life term, setting aside a Himachal Pradesh high court judgment which had disbelieved the prosecution story and had acquitted him.
Wife may get away lightly
In the West, perjury, that is, lying on oath before a court, is considered a serious crime. Millionaire author Jeffrey Archer was punished with a jail term of one year and a fine of 1,75,000 pounds in the UK.
But it is doubtful if Asha Ram’s wife, accused by her own daughter in an affidavit of forcing her to level rape charges against her father, will face as stiff a penalty as Archer, because in India the punishment is not severe.
— Read on m.timesofindia.com/india/Mom-forced-me-to-frame-papa-on-rape-charge/amp_articleshow/1307752.cms
A great father who did NOT like his future daughter in law is said to have forced / coerced his daughter to file a false rape case on her own lover husband as the father did NOT approve of their Arya Samaj marriage. Not only did they file a rape case on the poor fella, they also added abetment on his sister !!. Now both accused are acquitted by the courts ! of course there is NO punishment for the father or the false rape case filing girl !!
- Girl seems to have voluntarily eloped with the boy
- however, claiming that the girl is only 16 years old a rape case is filed and the boy incarcerated since 08. July 2015 !! (approx 11 months)
- Court notices and states the following “…. allegation of rape against the applicant but the same has not been corroborated by any medical evidence and surrounding circumstances is totally belies the prosecution case as well as statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Her medical report does not show any mark of injury, violence or sexual assault. He further submits that it is not a case of taking away or enticing away the prosecutrix as from a perusal of her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it is apparent that she has voluntarily eloped with the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 8.7.2015. The falsity of the case is apparent from the fact that the Nana and Baba of the applicant have also been implicated in the present case….”
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. – 4
Case :- BAIL No. – 4796 of 2016
Applicant :- Vimlesh Katheriya
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Jairam Bharti
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon’ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Jairam Bharti, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Sushma Shukla, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per medical opinion, prosecutrix is 16 years. The law is settled that the margin of error in ascertaining the age by radiological examination is two years on either side and hence the possibility of the prosecutrix being major cannot be ruled out. Although, she has made an allegation of rape against the applicant but the same has not been corroborated by any medical evidence and surrounding circumstances is totally belies the prosecution case as well as statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Her medical report does not show any mark of injury, violence or sexual assault. He further submits that it is not a case of taking away or enticing away the prosecutrix as from a perusal of her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it is apparent that she has voluntarily eloped with the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 8.7.2015. The falsity of the case is apparent from the fact that the Nana and Baba of the applicant have also been implicated in the present case.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Vimlesh Katheriya involved in Case Crime No. 587 of 2015 under sections 323, 342, 363, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, police station Mishrikh, District Sitapur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 14.6.2016
Visit http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/StartWebSearch.do for more Judgments/Orders delivered at Allahabad High Court and Its Bench at Lucknow.
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites (this one is from Allahabad HC website). Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
We do NOT know IF this is true. We are forwarding a news item for readers’ thoughts !!
Bengaluru private university vice chancellor Madhukar G. Angur held on rape charge
The vice chancellor of a private university here has been arrested for allegedly raping a 33-year-old woman, the police said on Saturday.
Bengaluru, Feb 6 (IANS) The vice chancellor of a private university here has been arrested for allegedly raping a 33-year-old woman, the police said on Saturday. ”We have arrested Madhukar G. Angur on Friday night on a complaint by the victim’s mother, who charged him with sexually abusing her daughter over a period, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Southeast) M.B. Boraingaiah told. Angur (55), a divorcee, is the vice-chancellor of Alliance University, set up in 2010 at Anekal on the city’s southern outskirts.
“The victim is the accused’s niece, who has been working in the university’s administrative office since 2011. As the complaint is filed by her mother, who is his sister, we are interrogating them and others in the family,” Boralingaiah said. Based on the written complaint, a first information report (FIR) has been registered against the accused under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). (Also Read: Man held for raping minor in Goregaon)
According to the complaint, the victim and the accused have been in relationship for a couple of years as Angur had promised to marry her but betrayed. ”The victim’s mother said her daughter went into depression and is under counselling to recover from the trauma of betrayal and deceit by the accused,” the IPS officer added. The accused also threatened the victim against complaining to the police or anyone else and blackmailed her mother with threats to “expose” their family.