PANKAJ MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMITTEDLY, the respondent no. 4 who is a lady lodged a false F. I. R. against the petitioner under section 376, I. P. C alleging rape of respondent No. 4 by the petitioner. When this writ petition was filed by the accused-petitioner for quashing of the F. I. R. , the respondent No. 4 appeared through a Counsel, admitting lodging of the false F. I. R. and supporting the petitioner's case.

(2.) BECAUSE lodging of false F. I. R. under section 376, I. P. C. which is not only a serious offence but also an offence involving moral turpitude, which may have very serious social and family repercussions apart from the legal consequences causing irreparable injury to the accused, therefore, we required the respondent no. 4 to disclose why she had lodged the false F. I. R. Initially the respondent no. 4 took the stand that her signatures were obtained on blank papers which were used for scribing and lodging the false F. I. R. But this contention was found to be absolutely false because the Investigating Officer who had been called by this Court appeared with the General Diary which mentioned that the girl had gone personally to lodge the said F. I. R. to the police station along with her mother and brother. Thereafter, the girl changed her stand that she was persuaded to lodge the F. I. R. by some student leader, although the G. D. entry suggested that she was persuaded to lodge the said F. I. R. by her family members. We required the girl repeatedly on several dates to disclose upon an affidavit as to who were the persons who instigated her to lodge the F. I. R. and in what manner.

(3.) THE respondent No. 4 did not comply with the directions of the Court and instead adopted a rigid stand that she would not disclose any facts, but submitted that she should be dealt with sympathetically. We decline to do that having regard to all the circumstances stated above.