The directions to the DGP have been issued by the bench of Justice Harpreet Singh Brar while hearing the plea of the woman petitioner, who sought to set aside the order of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sirsa, which had declined her application to register an FIR for sexual harassment and assault. The woman-petitioner alleged that her landlords had verbally harassed and physically assaulted her, following which she gave a complaint to the police but no action was taken.

The woman-petitioner’s counsel argued that the respondents had evicted her from her rented accommodation and were in illegal possession of her documents and household articles, and thus her application for registration for FIR should be allowed.

Justice Brar, upon reviewing the records of the case, noted that the petitioner had accused the owner of the house where she lived with her daughter as a tenant of molestation. During the police inquiry, it was discovered that the genesis of the issue lay in a dispute over vacating the rented accommodation, and it was concluded that no cognizable offence had taken place.

The Bench also observed that multiple cases with similar facts and allegations had been listed before the HC in the recent past, which compelled the Bench to check the credentials of the petitioner. “It was found that at least three cases were filed by the petitioner, with the same Aadhar ID,” the Bench noted. Further investigation revealed that all three petitions referred to sexual harassment complaints, and the cases pertained not just to Sirsa, but also to Jind, Kaithal, and Chandigarh.

The Bench also noted that in an order of July 4, 2024, it was observed that the petitioner had filed 19 sexual harassment complaints in Jind alone. Justice Brar asserted, “Sexual harassment causes great distress and humiliation to the victim, and false implication in such cases can cause equal distress, humiliation, and damage to the reputation of the accused and his family. The Court cannot remain a silent spectator to such manifestly frivolous and vexatious instances of false implication. In fact, the Court is duty-bound to look into such cases with extra care and scrutiny to protect innocent citizens.”

The HC added, “The impact of false implication is deeply stigmatic and creates a psychological burden on the person portrayed as the accused. He is doomed to live in a constant state of fear and anxiety due to the humiliation brought by the blemish of being a perpetrator of a sexual offence. The entire ordeal also unjustly taints the painstakingly built reputation of the wrongly accused, which is bound to have long-term adverse effects on his life and self-esteem. Such accusations have been known to cause ostracization of the family of the accused, which directly impacts their social standing as they are now seen as unsafe to commune with. Unsubstantiated, sweeping allegations cannot be taken at face value, especially when the conduct of the complainant seems dubious.”

Justice Brar further stated that courts must separate the chaff from the grain to ensure that the stream of justice is not clogged by ill-intended, vexatious proceedings. “This unscrupulous and unethical practice of initiating criminal prosecution to extort money from unsuspecting victims must be noted and strictly condemned to ensure that the judicial process is not used as an instrument of oppression and harassment. Stooping to such practices indubitably has wider ramifications on society as it becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish between genuine and false cases. If this modus operandi is allowed to continue unchecked, irreparable loss would be caused to society at large.”

Mentioning the NCRB data of crimes against women in India, which shows that 4,45,256 cases were registered in 2022 alone, equating to nearly 51 FIRs every hour, the HC said, “These unfortunate figures are to be understood in the backdrop of the social context where it takes a lot of courage for women in this country to come forward and report a crime in the first place. By instituting false cases, the sufferings of the victims are undermined, leading to a perception among women that even if they step forward to report an offence, they will not be taken seriously either by the investigating agency or the Court.”