Complaint Of Men Against Women Need Not Be Treated As Gospel Truth: Kerala High Court
The woman was accused of sexually assaulting her own child by the husband.
The Kerala High Court granted bail to a woman accused of sexually assaulting her 1.5-year-old child, emphasizing the need for thorough investigation and scrutiny of complaints in matrimonial disputes.
In this particular case, the woman was accused of sexually assaulting her own child under Sections 7, 8, 9(m), 9(n), and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), which pertains to aggravated sexual assault. The allegations were primarily based on a statement relayed by a third party, which the estranged husband claimed to have received from another woman. The woman, in response, filed for bail after fearing imminent arrest, asserting that the accusations were false and motivated by the ongoing custody battle between the couple.
A Bench of Justice PV Kunhikrishnan pointed out the troubling trend of matrimonial disputes escalating into criminal cases that often affect the lives of innocent individuals. It said, "There cannot be any unilateral investigation based on the complaint of a lady, treating it as gospel truth. The same principle is applicable vice versa too. The complaint of men against women need not be treated as gospel truth."
The Court, in its judgment, expressed concern over the potential misuse of legal provisions, particularly in cases arising from matrimonial disputes. The Court remarked, "The way matrimonial disputes are going in our society is shameful to all of us."
The Court also took note of the report submitted by the investigating officer, which revealed that there was uncertainty about the accuracy of the allegations and that further investigation was required before any formal action could be taken. The Court expressed surprise that an FIR was registered based solely on hearsay evidence, without any concrete proof to support the allegations. It emphasized the importance of gathering direct evidence and stated that, based on the available information, the allegations appeared dubious.
In addition, the Court took into consideration the woman’s claim that her estranged husband had taken the child into his custody by force, and that the police had not acted on her own complaints. The Court found the timing and nature of the husband’s complaint to be suspicious, raising doubts about its intent. This fueled the Court's concern that the allegations might be retaliatory in nature, given the ongoing custody dispute.
Ultimately, the Court granted the woman’s bail application, ordering her release on a self-bond of ₹50,000 in the event of her arrest. Furthermore, the Court directed that if the investigating officer determined that the allegations were false, appropriate legal action should be initiated against the complainant-husband.
Cause Title: XXX v State of Kerala, [2025:KER:17067]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates CA Chacko, CM Charisma, Babu VP, and Shahbas Aman CM
Respondent: Senior Public Prosecutor Noushad KA
