In a significant observation on the misuse of criminal laws in family disputes, the Supreme Court has cautioned courts against mechanically proceeding with sexual assault allegations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act when such complaints emerge from bitter matrimonial battles. The court noted a growing trend of estranged spouses allegedly using children as instruments to settle scores, extract higher settlements, or harass former partners.
A Bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan made the remarks while quashing a POCSO case filed against a man and his family members. The court concluded that the allegations appeared to be a “tutored” attempt to implicate the accused amid years of acrimonious litigation between the child’s parents.
Children caught in the crossfire of matrimonial warfare
The Supreme Court expressed concern that children are increasingly being dragged into disputes between estranged parents and are sometimes used to level serious allegations against fathers and paternal relatives.
Observing that such litigation often places a child at the centre of a legal battle, the court remarked that false and vexatious complaints can be employed as pressure tactics to secure financial advantages or to exact personal revenge. It stressed that courts must exercise heightened scrutiny when criminal allegations arise against the backdrop of prolonged matrimonial disputes marked by multiple rounds of litigation.
Case stemmed from years of family litigation
The matter involved a complaint filed by a woman against her estranged husband, mother-in-law, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law, alleging that her minor daughter had been subjected to sexual abuse by members of the paternal family. The couple, married in 2008, had been embroiled in legal disputes since 2011, with both sides filing several civil and criminal cases against each other over the years.
By the time the POCSO complaint was lodged, the families had already fought more than ten legal battles in various courts. The complaint contained allegations that the father and paternal uncle had sexually assaulted the child, while the grandmother and aunt had physically abused and threatened her. One particularly grave allegation claimed that the child’s aunt had inserted the handle of a hammer into the child’s private parts.
Supreme Court finds allegations lacking specifics
After examining the complaint and related material, the apex court found that the accusations were not supported by specific details regarding the time, place, or circumstances of the alleged incidents.
The Bench observed that while a complaint need not contain exhaustive details, serious charges such as rape cannot be sustained solely on broad and unsubstantiated assertions. The judges noted that the allegations emerged only after years of hostility and litigation between the parties, raising concerns about their credibility.
Court points to signs of tutoring
One of the factors that weighed heavily with the court was the striking similarity between the mother’s complaint, her statement, and the statement later recorded from the child.
The Bench noted that the three accounts appeared almost identical, describing them as a near “verbatim reproduction” rather than independent narratives. This, the court said, raised the possibility that the child had been coached or tutored before her statement was recorded. The judges further observed that the child had spent several months with her mother before her testimony was taken, providing ample opportunity for such influence.
Absence of medical evidence proved crucial
The Supreme Court also found the complete lack of medical evidence particularly significant given the severity of the allegations. It noted that no medical records were produced to support claims of repeated sexual assault or the allegation involving the hammer handle, despite the nature of the injuries that such acts would ordinarily cause.
The prosecution, the court said, failed to explain why no medical examination had been conducted or why no documentary evidence of treatment was placed on record.
Warning against frivolous criminal litigation
While quashing the complaint, the cognisance order, and the summons issued against the accused family members, the court also issued a broader warning about the misuse of criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes.
The Bench urged courts and members of the legal fraternity to discourage frivolous litigation based on false allegations and advised lawyers against encouraging such tactics. It emphasised that criminal law should not become a weapon in personal disputes and that courts must remain vigilant against attempts to misuse serious offences as leverage in family conflicts.
At the same time, the Supreme Court clarified that its observations were confined to the facts of the present case and should not be interpreted as undermining the seriousness of genuine cases involving sexual offences against women and children.
