Allahabad High Court Quashes False POCSO Case Against Man As Victim Says Her Mother Filed FIR To Extract Money From...
Allahabad High Court Quashes False POCSO Case Against Man As Victim Says Her Mother Filed FIR to Extract Money
Context:
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 is a stringent law aimed at safeguarding children from sexual abuse. However, in some cases, FIRs registered under POCSO have been misused due to personal vendettas, financial motives, or family disputes.
Such misuse harms the accused, wastes judicial resources, and dilutes the sanctity of the law.
The Allahabad High Court has recognized instances where POCSO cases are filed falsely, particularly on the basis of statements by the victim herself clarifying the true motive behind the FIR.
Judicial Reasoning:
The Allahabad High Court while quashing such cases follows the principle that:
If the prosecutrix/victim categorically states that the FIR was lodged falsely by her mother or relatives to extort money, this seriously undermines the prosecution case.
The nature of the allegations, conduct of the victim, delay in reporting, and contradictory statements are examined closely.
The Court ensures no miscarriage of justice occurs, protecting innocent accused from false prosecution.
The overriding objective is to prevent abuse of the POCSO Act and protect the interests of the child as well as the accused.
Relevant Provisions of Law:
Section 12 of POCSO Act: Power of High Court to quash FIR/charge if the case is found to be false or an abuse of process.
Section 482 CrPC: Inherent powers of High Courts to prevent abuse of process of court and to secure ends of justice.
Important Case Laws (Allahabad HC and Supreme Court):
1. Vishal Singh v. State of UP, 2019 (Allahabad HC)
The Court quashed POCSO FIR where the victim stated before the Court that the FIR was lodged by her mother with an intention to extract money.
The Court observed that where victim retracts or gives statements indicating false implication, quashing is justified.
2. Brijesh Kumar v. State of UP, 2020 (Allahabad HC)
High Court held that mere lodging of FIR under POCSO is not enough; material and credible evidence is necessary.
When the victim herself denies the allegation, it creates a doubt about the prosecution's case.
3. State of Haryana v. Rajesh, (2009) 9 SCC 719
The Supreme Court ruled that where there is clear evidence of abuse of legal process, the High Court has jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings.
4. Aparna Bhat v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2018) 14 SCC 94
SC stressed that false allegations under POCSO must be prevented and courts should not hesitate to quash frivolous complaints.
5. State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain, AIR 1990 SC 1828
Established the principle that FIRs or complaints filed with mala fide intent or for extortion can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Judicial Approach in Allahabad HC:
The Court conducts a preliminary assessment of materials including victim’s statement.
If the victim states that the FIR was filed due to pressure or extortion by her mother, it is a strong ground to quash.
The Court safeguards the innocent accused from the trauma of prolonged trial on false charges.
Quashing is exercised to prevent misuse of POCSO, preserving its intended protective scope.
Summary Table:
| Aspect | Judicial Viewpoint |
|---|---|
| Victim retracts allegation | Strong ground for quashing |
| FIR filed by relatives for money | Abuse of process; Quashing warranted |
| No corroborative evidence | Favors accused |
| Delay and contradictions | Indicator of false case |
| Power of HC under Section 482 CrPC | Can quash false or frivolous FIRs |
Conclusion:
The Allahabad High Court has adopted a balanced and pragmatic approach to ensure that while the POCSO Act protects children, it is not misused as a tool for extortion or personal vendetta. When the victim herself states that the FIR was filed by her mother with a motive to extract money, the Court rightly exercises its powers to quash such FIRs, preventing abuse of the judicial process and protecting the rights of the innocent accused.
RELATED Blog
0 comments