False Rape Case: Madhya Pradesh High Court Says Prosecutrix Must Be Asked To Refund Compensation Paid By State

Deciding the bail application moved by the Applicant/accused, Justice Vivek Agarwal observed-

Trial court will consider issuance of a direction against the prosecutrix to refund the amount received by her because she admitted in her examination in chief that she has lodged false report on account of some oral dispute between the parties. Therefore, alleged false report is lodged, therefore she is not entitled to keep the amount of compensation paid by the State government collected from the tax payer of the country. Thus, trial court will consider to direct the prosecutrix to refund that amount in the appropriate head of the treasury account.

The facts of the case were that the Applicant was accused for offences punishable under Section 376, 376(2)(N), 506 IPC, U/S 3, 4, 5J(ii), 5L POCSO Act and under Section 3(1)(w)(II), 3(1)(w)(II), 3(II)(V) of SC/ST Act.

The Applicant submitted before the Court that the Prosecutrix had turned hostile before the trial court and was not supporting the prosecution story. He further pointed out that even her grandmother and her uncle had turned hostile. He asserted that there was no chance of Prosecutrix being influenced and that all the other material witnesses had been examined. He prayed that since his trial would take time to conclude, he be enlarged on bail.

Considering the facts of the case and documents on record the Court, the Court thought it to be a fit case for grant of bail-

Taking into consideration submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the fact that prosecutrix is already examined, she has not supported the prosecution story and applicant is in custody since 03/11/2021. Hence without commenting anything on merits of the case, this bail application is allowed.

With the aforesaid observations, the Court allowed the application and accordingly, the Applicant was granted bail.