False accusations leave unhealed scars: Delhi High Court upholds discharge of 3 men, calls for scrutiny in rape cases

Background

An FIR was registered in 2023 under sections 376 (rape) and 328 (causing hurt by means of poison or other harmful substances with the intent to commit an offence).

The complainant had alleged that she was lured on the promise of a job, taken to a flat in Noida, and sexually assaulted by three men.

The investigation carried out by the police culminated in a chargesheet under the two sections of the IPC.

The court had relied on the woman’s revised statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC, according to which she withdrew her claims of having characterised the relationship with one of the accused persons as consensual while exonerating others.

The provision allows a magistrate to record confessions or statements (like those from victims or witnesses) during an investigation, ensuring they are voluntary and reliable for later trial use, often by getting a confession away from police influence to overcome inadmissibility under Indian Evidence Act.

The provision further stipulates that the magistrate must warn the person they aren’t bound to speak and question them to confirm voluntariness, especially in sensitive cases like POCSO, often recorded via audio-video means.

Arguments

Additional public prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar, challenging the discharge, argued that the trial court erred in ignoring the detailed allegations made in the FIR and the medical examination report, which recorded bruises and the prosecutrix’s narration of sexual assault.

He contended that contradictions between the FIR and later statements could not, by themselves, justify discharge at the stage of framing of charges and that the matter ought to have gone to trial.

Opposing the submissions of the state, advocate Lokesh Kumar Mishra, appearing for the accused, relied heavily on the Section 164 CrPC statement, arguing that it was recorded voluntarily before a magistrate and completely exonerated them.

He submitted that the prosecutrix had admitted to a consensual relationship and expressly stated that no offence had taken place.

Observations

• A false complaint of a sexual offence does not end with harm to the person falsely accused alone.
• No “strong or grave suspicion” against the accused that would justify putting them to trial.
• Such cases gradually create doubt and hesitation in the minds of people at large, where even a genuine complaint of sexual assault may begin to be viewed with suspicion.
• When serious allegations are made and then withdrawn without explanation, it weakens public confidence in the process meant to protect victims of sexual violence.
• The unfortunate result is that women who have truly suffered such crimes may find their voices questioned or their experiences doubted.
• For this reason, false allegations of sexual offences cannot be treated lightly and must invite careful and firm scrutiny in accordance with law, so that genuine victims are not made to suffer on account of misuse by a few.
• The harm caused by false implication cannot be undone merely by an order of discharge.
• Such harm cannot be undone merely by an order of discharge or a few words of sympathy.
• The effective implementation of recovery provisions pertaining to money given to the survivors of sexual assault who later resile from their statement resulting acquittal of the accused is essential to preserve the integrity of victim compensation frameworks.
• If interim compensation disbursed in cases where allegations are subsequently withdrawn or found to be false is routinely allowed to remain unrecovered, it may not only result in misuse of public funds but may also dilute the credibility and sustainability of schemes meant to support genuine victims of sexual violence.