Every part They Say Not Gospel Reality: Kerala Excessive Court docket On Legal Complaints By Ladies
Kochi:
The Kerala Excessive Court docket has held that in legal circumstances, together with sexual crimes, there isn’t a presumption that every little thing the complainant girl says is “gospel reality” as these days there’s a tendency to implicate harmless individuals in such issues.
The observations by Justice P V Kunhikrishnan got here whereas granting anticipatory bail to a person accused of sexually harassing a former girl worker.
The excessive courtroom mentioned that within the prompt case, the police didn’t examine the accused’s preliminary criticism that the lady had verbally abused and made threats towards him after he fired her for not working correctly.
The courtroom mentioned that investigation of a legal case means probing the case of the complainant and the accused.
“There can’t be any unilateral investigation of the case put up by the complainant alone. Merely as a result of the de facto complainant is a woman, there isn’t a presumption that, in all circumstances, her variations are gospel reality, and the police can proceed based mostly on her assertion with out contemplating the case of the accused.
“These days, there’s a tendency to implicate harmless individuals in legal circumstances with critical allegations of sexual assault,” it mentioned in its order dated February 24.
The courtroom additional mentioned that if the police discover that the allegations of such ladies towards males are false, “they will very nicely take motion towards the complainants additionally” because the regulation permits it.
The courtroom additionally mentioned that the damages brought about to a citizen due to false implication can’t be compensated by cost of cash alone.
“His integrity, place within the society, fame, and many others, may be ruined by a single false criticism. The police authorities must be alert and vigilant, to seek out the reality in legal circumstances through the investigation stage itself.
“Therefore, it’s the obligation of the police to separate the chaff from the grain, earlier than submitting closing stories in legal circumstances,” it mentioned.
Within the prompt case, the lady had alleged that the accused, who was the supervisor of an organization the place she labored, grabbed her arms with sexual intent.
However, the accused had complained to the police concerning the girl’s verbal abuse and threats and in addition gave a pen drive containing an audio recording of what she had mentioned, in accordance with the courtroom order.
The courtroom mentioned it was a match case the place the investigating officer (IO) must have probed the accused’s criticism additionally.
It directed the accused to provide the pen drive earlier than the IO and ordered the officer to research the identical.
“…if the de facto complainant (girl) is discovered to have submitted a false case towards the petitioner (accused), applicable motion, in accordance with regulation, must be taken,” the courtroom mentioned.
It directed the accused to look earlier than the IO for interrogation and mentioned that if he was arrested, then he shall be launched on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties every for the like sum.
The opposite bail situations included showing earlier than the IO as and when required, cooperating with the probe and to not affect or intimidate witnesses within the case.
(Apart from the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV workers and is printed from a syndicated feed.)
