High Court's Stern Remarks Against Mother for Filing False Case Due to Family Dispute

In a significant judgment, the Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against a father and his family members. The court observed that the mother had misused the law due to marital disputes and stated that the innocence of children should not be turned into a battlefield for parental vendettas.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed this order. In this case, a 35-year-old man, his father, mother, and brother had filed the petition. His wife, aged 33, had registered the case in May this year, alleging sexual assault on their 3-year-old daughter. The court explicitly stated that a child cannot be reduced to a weapon in the arsenal of an estranged spouse. The innocence of childhood cannot be used as currency to settle marital accounts. Furthermore, the protection of the child cannot be sacrificed due to false allegations by parents.

The court noted that the entire case stemmed from a marital dispute ongoing since 2024. The father had obtained visitation rights for the child through orders from the Family Court and subsequently the High Court. The mother had filed a complaint on May 18, stating that after returning from a visit with the father on May 16 and 17, redness and abrasion were observed in the minor child's private parts.

However, based on affidavits provided by two doctors from a private hospital in Bengaluru, the court found that the details recorded in the medical notes were "non-specific clinical findings." The doctors stated that the examination conducted was merely to check for the possibility of a Urinary Tract Infection (UTI). The mother herself had taken the child to these doctors for the examination.

The court noted that no doctor had conducted a medico-legal examination of the child. The entire allegation was based on inferences drawn by the mother from the medical notes, whereas the doctors themselves had not linked the matter to sexual assault. The court remarked sternly that "medical opinion has been forced to speak what it does not say." The court further added that no elements of an offence under the POCSO Act are visible in the complaint.

Justice Nagaprasanna stated that an increasing number of marital disputes are coming before the courts where allegations of serious criminal misconduct are linked with proceedings for custody, visitation, and parental access. In such cases, the child often stands at the intersection of two opposing narratives, where each parent claims to be acting in the best interest of the child.

The court warned that the risk is not only that a parent may be falsely accused, but also that a genuine complaint by a child may be suppressed due to marital enmity. Vigilance is necessary for both possibilities, but no assumption can be made solely on the basis of marital differences.

According to a report by The Hindu, the court has granted the child's father and his family members the liberty to initiate proceedings against the child's mother under Section 22 of the POCSO Act, if they so wish. This section provides for legal action against persons who file false complaints or provide false information.