Supreme Court stays FIR against mother for allegedly making false allegations that father sexually abused her three-year-old child

A bank made of Justices BV Nagarathna and NK Singh was informed that according to the observations of the Single Judge of the High Court of Kerala, Judge PV KunhikrishnanIn paragraph 16 of the impugned order, an FIR was filed against the petitioner (wife) under Section 22 of the POCSO read with Section 117 of the Kerala Police Act.

In a case where the mother alleged that the father had sexually abused her three-year-old child, the Kerala High Court found that the mother had filed a “frivolous complaint” with the ulterior motive of getting custody of the child. In the statement of the child victim under 164 CrPC, which she gave against the mother, it was stated: “Even the three year old child who is being taught to testify against his own father testified before the judge that he likes his father more than his mother. This is a fitting case where the charges against the complainant who is the father of the victim must be dropped in the light of the above discussions..”

While the quashing of the charges against the father is subject to quashing, the High Court stated in paragraph 16: “I strongly believe that the POCSO courts hearing cases like this where the father of the minor child is accused of sexual abuse, especially when it is a custody dispute, should keep examining the facts before deciding the cases. All cases are decided by all courts with great caution. But these kinds of cases should be taken very seriously because if the allegations are true, it is serious; but if the allegations are false, a man is crucified without any basis and he is defamed in the society due to such allegations..”

“Therefore, it is the duty of the court to ensure that no false allegations are made against the parents, especially when there is a dispute over custody. Moreover, Section 22 of the POCSO Act provides penalties for false allegations or false statements. In appropriate cases, the court should inform the police for investigation if there is a prima facie case under Section 22 of the POCSO Act. This is an appropriate case where the investigating officer in Criminal Case No. 668/2015 has to examine whether the second respondent has committed an offence under Section 22 of the POCSO Act.

Section 22 of the POCSO Act states that any person who files a false complaint against another person in respect of an offence under sections 3, 5, 7 and 9 or provides false information against him solely with the intention to humiliate, extort, threaten or defame him shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or with fine or with both. This is a matter to be investigated by the investigating officer in the case. All POCSO courts should take appropriate action in this regard if it is found that a false complaint or false information has been filed by the complainants. If the POCSO court after trial finds that there is a false allegation in the case of the accused, the POCSO court should direct the police authorities to register a case under section 22 of the POCSO Act and proceed as per the law.', the Supreme Court noted.