Allahabad HC grants bail to rape accused, takes serious note of complainant turning hostile
The Allahabad High Court has observed that dispensation of justice in a criminal trial is a serious issue and cannot be allowed to become a mockery by simply allowing prime prosecution witnesses /victims to turn hostile as a ground of acquittal while granting bail to a rape accused.
A single bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh heard the bail application of the accused who is involved in Case Crime under Section 376/34 IPC, P.S. Anoopshahr, District Bulandshahr .
This is the second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by the High Court vide order dated 13.08.2021 .
The main substratum of argument of counsel for the applicant is that the evidence of the victim has been recorded before the trial court on 30.07.2021 in which she has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. She stated that she had made the allegation of rape in her statement under Section164 CrPC at the behest of her husband and police.
It is also pointed out that other co accused namely, have been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of the High Court vide order dated25.02.2022 and 26.04.2022 .
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused as well as considering the fact that the victim in her evidence before the trial court has not supported the prosecution case and that the other co accused have been granted bail, the High Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed by the Court.
Before parting with this case, the Court observed, “Nowadays, the practice of stating falsehood are increasing and the same is on higher side. On account of allegation of rape against the applicant, the image of the applicant has been tarnished in the society. He was arrested and suffered the ignominy of being involved in most hatred offence of rape. He lost reverence in the society whereas every one has right to live with dignity in the society. On acquittal of the accused on the ground that victim turned hostile, the stigma against him may be washed away to the certain extent but that is not enough. Itis well settled that presumption of innocence will have to be balanced with the right of victim and accused as well as above all societal interest for enforcing the rule of law. Neither accused nor victim or any witnesses should be permitted to subvert a criminal trial by stating falsehood and resort to contrivances, so as to make it theatre of the absurd. Dispensation of justice in a criminal trial is a serious issue and cannot be allowed to become a mockery by simply allowing prime prosecution witnesses /victims to turn hostile as a ground of acquittal. Complainants should also be accountable and should take responsibility on their shoulder.”
“Considering the societal interest, it is high time for the trial court to resort to Section 344 CrPC in appropriate cases. In the present case since the prosecutrix before the trial court has turned hostile and completely denied the prosecution version, therefore she is not entitled to the benefit of any compensation paid by the Government, which has been collected from the taxpayers of the country,” the order reads.
Therefore the High Court directed the trial court to consider the issuance of necessary direction against the alleged prosecutrix/ victim to refund the amount of compensation, if any received by her, in the appropriate head of the treasury account and shall also ensure the compliance of provisions of Section 344 CrPC at the appropriate stage, if it deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.