Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Rape Accused As Victim Resiled From Her Statement, Orders Refund Of Compensation Paid To Her

The Allahabad High Court recently granted bail to a rape accused in view of the fact that the victim had not supported the prosecution's case during the trial and that she had been declared hostile.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh also issued direction to the trial court to take steps for a refund of the compensation paid to her and also, ensure compliance of Section 344 CrPC [Summary procedure for trial for giving false evidence] in the instant case.

"Considering the societal interest, it is high time for the trial court to resort to Section 344 Cr.P.C in appropriate cases. In the present case since the prosecutrix before the trial Court has turned hostile and completely denied the prosecution's 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 court ordered as it granted bail to the accused.

The bail applicant (Hariom Sharma) had been accused of raping the victim and he was arrested on December 12, 2020. His first bail application was rejected on August 13, 2021, in view of the Victim's statement under Section 164 CrPC.

However, during the trial, she had not accepted the prosecution's case and she had been declared hostile. She also stated that she had made the allegation of rape in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. at the behest of her husband and police.

In view of this, the accused moved the instant second bail plea arguing that the coaccused have been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of the High Court and that his case stands on a better footing.

Against this backdrop, the Court decided to grant him bail, however, before parting with the case, the Court did note that nowadays, the practice of stating falsehood is being increased and the same is on the higher side.

The Court also observed that in the instant case, on account of the allegation of rape against the applicant, the image of the applicant had been tarnished in the society and he was arrested and he suffered the ignominy of being involved in most hatred offence of rape.

"He lost reverence in the society whereas everyone has right to live with dignity in the society. On the acquittal of the accused on the ground that the victim turned hostile, the stigma against him may be washed away to a certain extent but that is not enough," the Court added.

Further, stressing that in such cases the complainants should also be held accountable and should take responsibility on their shoulders, the Court opined thus:

"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."

Case title - Hariom Sharma v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12379 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 276

Click Here To Read/Download the order