Supreme Court Grants Relief to Accused in UP Rape and POCSO Case: Directs Discharge Application Before Trial Court
The Supreme Court of India recently ruled in Iqbal @ Bala & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., directing the accused to file a discharge application before the Trial Court rather than quashing the FIR at this stage. The judgment, delivered by B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, emphasized that the allegations, though lacking specific details, required judicial scrutiny at the trial stage rather than outright dismissal at the FIR stage.
The ruling highlights the importance of careful evaluation of criminal complaints, particularly in cases where allegations of sexual offenses and abuse under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act are involved. It also underscores the role of the courts in ensuring that legal proceedings are not misused for personal vendetta.
Background of the Case
The case stemmed from FIR No. 122 of 2022, registered on June 21, 2022, at the Women’s Police Station, Mirzapur, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh. The complainant alleged that she was repeatedly raped over a prolonged period by the primary accused, Iqbal @ Bala, and his brother Mehmood, while also accusing other co-accused of sexually assaulting her minor daughter.
Chronology of Events
- 2019: The complainant alleges that she was forced to stay in the house of Iqbal @ Bala and subjected to repeated sexual assaults.
- June 21, 2022: FIR is lodged under Sections 376, 323, and 354(A) of the IPC and Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act.
- July 13, 2022: The Allahabad High Court refuses to quash the FIR.
- August 8, 2023: The Supreme Court directs the accused to file a discharge application before the Trial Court.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The accused, represented by Senior Counsel Siddhartha Dave, contended:
- The allegations were vague and lacked specific details such as time, date, and exact place of occurrence.
- The delay of more than three years in filing the complaint raised serious doubts about its authenticity.
- The complainant continued to live at the accused’s residence for months without attempting to escape, further weakening the case.
- The allegations under the POCSO Act were not supported by medical evidence or any forensic report.
- The FIR was politically motivated, as the accused was an influential figure and had multiple FIRs lodged against him after a political regime change in 2017.
- Despite the serious nature of allegations, the High Court did not analyze the case in light of past Supreme Court rulings regarding malicious prosecution.
Respondent’s Arguments
The State of Uttar Pradesh, represented by Additional Advocate General Garima Prasad, countered:
- The victim had been threatened and silenced for years, which explained the delay in filing the complaint.
- Independent witnesses confirmed that the complainant used to visit the accused’s house for domestic work and later started residing there.
- The charge sheet was ready, but proceedings were stalled due to the stay granted by the Supreme Court.
- Statements of the complainant and her minor daughter (under Section 161 CrPC) explicitly named the accused and detailed instances of abuse.
- The accused, particularly Iqbal @ Bala, had a history of multiple criminal cases, showing a pattern of unlawful activities.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
The Supreme Court analyzed the matter from the perspective of procedural fairness and the need to balance victim rights with protection against false accusations.
1. Lack of Specific Allegations
The Court noted that the FIR lacked specific details such as dates and times, which are critical in cases of sexual offenses.
“The victim has not furnished any information in regard to the date and time of the commission of the alleged offense. At the same time, we also take notice of the fact that the investigation has been completed and charge sheet is ready to be filed.”
2. Option of Discharge Instead of FIR Quashing
The Court ruled that instead of quashing the FIR outright, the accused should approach the Trial Court with a discharge application.
“Although the allegations leveled in the FIR do not inspire confidence, yet we are of the view that the appellants should prefer a discharge application before the Trial Court under Section 227 of the CrPC.”
3. Role of the High Court in Assessing Malicious FIRs
The Court emphasized that when an FIR appears to be driven by political or personal vengeance, a deeper scrutiny is required.
“Whenever an accused comes before the Court invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash an FIR, the Court must examine the matter with great care.”
4. Political Angle and Multiple FIRs
The Court acknowledged that the accused had faced multiple FIRs after a political shift in the state, raising concerns of misuse of legal proceedings.
“Multiple FIRs have been registered over a period of time. The registration of such cases assumes importance, thereby attracting the issue of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge.”
Final Verdict
The Supreme Court ruled:
- The FIR was not quashed, but the accused were given the liberty to file a discharge application before the Trial Court.
- The Trial Court must examine whether any case for discharge is made out based on evidence collected in the investigation.
- The Court refused to make a final determination on the truthfulness of the allegations at this stage.
This ruling highlights the judiciary’s role in ensuring that criminal proceedings are not misused while also safeguarding the rights of victims to seek justice.
Petitioner Name: Iqbal @ Bala & Ors..Respondent Name: State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors..Judgment By: Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice J.B. Pardiwala.Place Of Incident: Mirzapur, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh.Judgment Date: 08-08-2023.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: iqbal-@-bala-&-ors.-vs-state-of-uttar-prade-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-08-08-2023.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Rape Cases
See all petitions in SC/ST Act Case
See all petitions in Judgment by B R Gavai
See all petitions in Judgment by J.B. Pardiwala
See all petitions in partially allowed
See all petitions in Remanded
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments August 2023
See all petitions in 2023 judgments
See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
