LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Laishram Premila Devi & Ors Vs The State & Ors: It Is Now Becoming A Trend To Register FIRs Alleging Sexual Harassment Cases To Force A Party To Withdraw Complaint Or To Arm Twist A Party

Adv. Sanjeev Sirohi ,
  06 April 2021       Share Bookmark

Court :
Delhi High Court
Brief :
It is remarkable, righteous, refreshing, rejuvenating and reasonable to learn that while ruling explicitly, elegantly, eloquently and effectively that time has come to initiate action against persons who file frivolous complaints under Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D IPC etc only for an ulterior purpose, the Delhi High Court has just recently on February 23, 2021 in a latest, learned, laudable and landmark decision titled Laishram Premila Devi & Ors. vs The State & Ors. in CRL. M.C. 533/2021 and CRL.M.C. 534/2021 has imposed a cost of Rs. 30,000 on the petitioners with a warning not to file false and frivolous cases. It is a national tragedy that we see that laws meant for protection of women are fast turning into weapons of stabbing men in the most cowardly, dastardly and gruesome manner. But our lawmakers care a damn for it! This alone explains why there is no provision in our laws whereby she is made to suffer in the same manner as the man if she dares to ever level false charges against men!
Citation :
Laishram Premila Devi & Ors. vs The State & Ors. in CRL. M.C. 533/2021 and CRL.M.C. 534/2021

It is remarkable, righteous, refreshing, rejuvenating and reasonable to learn that while ruling explicitly, elegantly, eloquently and effectively that time has come to initiate action against persons who file frivolous complaints under Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D IPC etc only for an ulterior purpose, the Delhi High Court has just recently on February 23, 2021 in a latest, learned, laudable and landmark decision titled Laishram Premila Devi & Ors. vs The State & Ors. in CRL. M.C. 533/2021 and CRL.M.C. 534/2021 has imposed a cost of Rs. 30,000 on the petitioners with a warning not to file false and frivolous cases. It is a national tragedy that we see that laws meant for protection of women are fast turning into weapons of stabbing men in the most cowardly, dastardly and gruesome manner. But our lawmakers care a damn for it! This alone explains why there is no provision in our laws whereby she is made to suffer in the same manner as the man if she dares to ever level false charges against men!

It is a matter of national shame, national disgrace and national humiliation that a man named Vishnu Tiwari had to suffer without committing any offence 20 years of incarceration in connection with a false rape case filed against him by a woman owing to an alleged land dispute in Lalitpur district in UP. He was acquitted just recently by the Allahabad High Court but only after spending 20 years in jail! Why is it that a woman who files a false rape case is not similarly made to undergo rigorous imprisonment for at least the same period which the man had to undergo? Why is she usually let off without even imposing any jail term or even fine or even reprimand!  Why our lawmakers most shamelessly, senselessly and stupidly not do anything on this score?

To put it mildly: Why women has been given the unfettered licence to attack men whenever she likes to level most absurd charges against men as we see in this case and in Vishnu Tiwari case and so many other cases also and then yet escape away very lightly? This has to be checked immediately by imposing strict punishment on those who dare to malign men without any valid ground so that no women ever dare to take the right to life and personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution for granted! Is women stupid, senseless, mad and lunatic that she does not understand anything when she levels most serious allegation against men of rape, against her own husband of dowry charges using Section Section 498A of IPC as most potent weapon where most of the cases are also found to be false and in many other cases?

It is high time and women also now must be held accountable for her misdeeds! She should not be let off lightly or after imposing just some fine as she is solely culpable for ruining man’s life for no fault of his! As we all know that women these days demands equality in every field then why should she demand exemption here? No women of right senses will ever demand so and she should be seriously taken to task if she does something wrong intentionally against men!

To start with, the ball is set rolling by single Judge Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad of Delhi High Court who authored this leading judgment by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “CRL.M.C. 533/2021 has been filed for quashing FIR No.239/2017 dated 12.05.2017, registered at Police Vasant Kunj(North), New Delhi for offences under Sections 509, 506, 323, 341, 354, 354A and 34 IPC. The complainant/respondent No.2 in the said FIR has alleged that on 12.05.2017, when she was going to drop her children to school, the accused who reside in the neighbourhood beat her and outraged her modesty and also committed act of sexual harassment. The contents of FIR are not being repeated here.”

As we see, the Bench then observes in para 2 that, “CRL.M.C. 534/2021 has been filed for quashing FIR No.238/2017 dated 12.05.2017, registered at Police Vasant Kunj(North), New Delhi for offences under Sections 509, 506, 323, 341, 354, 354A and 34 IPC.”

While elaborating on the facts of the case, the Bench then points out in para 3 that, “The complainant in the said FIR is the accused in CRL.M.C. 533/2021. The allegation in this FIR is that the petitioners herein have committed offences punishable under Section 354 IPC i.e. assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty. The parties in all the FIRs are residents of 95/9, Kisangarh, Vasant Kunj, Delhi, and are neighbours.”

To put things in perspective, the Bench then envisages in para 4 that, “It is stated that with the intervention of some common friends, relatives and family members, the parties have settled their dispute and an oral settlement has been reached between the parties. It is stated that both the parties, the petitioners and respondents in CRL.M.C. 533/2021 and CRL.M.C. 534/2021, have realised their mistake and they had decided to compromise the matter.”

As it turned out, the Bench then stated in para 5 that, “As per the said oral settlement, the parties have agreed that they will approach this Court for the quashing of the abovementioned FIRs. It is stated that they had agreed that they will maintain harmonious relations with each other. It is requested that the FIRs be quashed as the dispute has been amicably resolved.”

To be sure, the Bench then also discloses in para 6 that, “The parties have also filed their respective affidavits affirming the fact that the matter has been settled amicably. It is also stated that the complainants in both the petitions do not have any objection if the instant FIRs and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.”

Most significantly and most remarkably, what forms the cornerstone of this brilliant, brief, blunt and bold judgment is then stated superbly and suavely in para 7 wherein it is held explicitly, elegantly, eloquently and effectively that, “Unfortunately, it is now becoming a trend to register FIRs alleging offences under Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D IPC either to force a party from withdrawing a complaint instituted against them or to arm twist a party. Offences under Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D IPC are serious offences. Such allegations have the effect of tarnishing the image of the person against whom such allegations are made. Allegations regarding these offences cannot be made at a drop of a hat. This practice is an abuse of the process of law. The instant case is a classic example as to how frivolous allegations of Section 354 and 354A have been levelled by the parties against each other. A small fight regarding parking has been escalated by levelling allegation of outraging modesty of women. This court can take judicial notice of the fact that the police force is very limited. Police personnel have to spend time in investigating frivolous cases. They have to attend court proceedings, prepare Status Report etc. The result is that investigation in serious offences gets compromised and accused escape because of shoddy investigation. Time has come to initiate action against persons who file frivolous complaints under Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D IPC etc. only for ulterior purpose. Some of the petitioners in these instant petitions are students who should understand not to take courts and the police for granted and assume that anything and everything can be settled and they can get away by filing false cases.”

Furthermore, the Bench then goes on to add in para 8 that, “In view of the mutual settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court is satisfied that no useful purpose will be served in prosecuting with the present proceedings. Resultantly, the FIR No.238/2017 and FIR No.239/2017 dated 12.05.2017, under Sections 509, 506, 323, 341, 354, 354A and 34 IPC registered at Police Vasant Kunj(North), New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed. The parties shall remain bound by the mutual settlement and the undertaking given to the Court.”

Finally, while disposing of the petition as stated in para 8, the Bench then holds in para 9 that, “Since the Police has had to spend valuable time in investigating the offence and considerable time has been spent by the Court in the criminal proceedings initiated by the parties, this Court is inclined to impose cost on the petitioners with a warning not to file false and frivolous cases. The petitioners in CRL.M.C. 533/2021 are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with ‘DHCBA Lawyers Social Security and Welfare Fund’ within three weeks from today and the petitioners in CRL.M.C.534/2021 are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with ‘DHCBA Lawyers Social Security and Welfare Fund’ within three weeks from today. Details of the Account are as under:

  • Account Name: DHCBA Lawyers Social Security and Welfare Fund
  • Account Number: 15530100009730
  • Bank Name: UCO Bank          
  • Branch: Sher Shah Road, New Delhi
  • IFSC Code: UCBA0001553

Copy of the receipts be also filed with the Registry to show compliance of the order.”

While what the learned Judge – Justice Subramonium Prasad of the Delhi High Court has held is best suited in the present circumstances but it is high time and now penal law must be amended suitably. A woman under no circumstances should be allowed to get away lightly after levelling the most serious allegations which tarnishes the reputation and dignity of man to the hilt and in many cases he is made to suffer imprisonment in fake cases as we saw most recently in Vishnu Tiwari case where he had to suffer imprisonment in a fake rape case for no fault of his! This is terrible!

It must also be asked: How can those women who dare to hit men below the belt be allowed to escape so lightly with a mere warning or a fine of few thousand rupees? Laws meant for protection of women cannot be allowed under any circumstances to become a potent weapon to harm men below the belt in the most heinous manner under the garb of "seeking justice for women"! Laws are meant to be used and not abused but most unfortunately we are seeing that in many cases laws meant to protect women are themselves becoming potent weapon of abuse and this is what needs to be checked, combated and decimated by punishing severely all those who dare to indulge in it! This is what our lawmakers are showing no intention to do and this is what merits course correction by immediately amending our concerned penal laws accordingly. It cannot be held in abeyance any longer now!

 
"Loved reading this piece by Adv. Sanjeev Sirohi?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"



Published in Others
Views : 1791




Comments