Our relative farmers revolutionary was falsly impllocated in pocso st

703 votes

There are Various legal Remedies to deal with it . Rest depends on matter. feel free to Contact for further advice and assistance Thank You Regards Advocate Kuber Hooda Punjab and Haryana High Court Delhi High Court

Advocate Kuber Hooda LawRato

603 votes

The arrest of the accused is patently illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional safeguards. The accused was arrested without any prior intimation of arrest or grounds thereof, in complete violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and the mandatory guidelines laid down in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal. The case appears to be a false and motivated prosecution under the SC/ST Act and POCSO Act, driven by a political nexus with the local police. Material evidence in the form of CCTV footage clearly establishes that the accused was present at his residence at the alleged time of occurrence, thereby falsifying the prosecution story at the threshold. Further, the conduct of the complainant is highly suspicious and unreliable. The father of the alleged victim has given contradictory versions before the media—first stating that the accused was present at the scene, and later stating that the accused was not present and that three other boys kidnapped the girl, who was known to one of them. These contradictions go to the root of the case and destroy the credibility of the prosecution. Moreover, the FIR itself is vague and defective, as it does not mention the specific date and time of the alleged offence, which is a basic requirement in criminal law. Despite these serious infirmities, the accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody mechanically, without due application of mind. Such misuse of stringent penal provisions warrants strict judicial scrutiny and appropriate relief to prevent miscarriage of justice.

Advocate Poonam Malik LawRato

712 votes

From the facts narrated, the arrest is prima facie illegal, arbitrary, and in clear violation of settled procedural safeguards, particularly when effected without prior intimation in a serious case under the SC/ST Act and POCSO. The prosecution case is inherently weak as the FIR does not disclose the basic ingredients of the alleged offence, including the specific date and time, which strikes at the root of a fair investigation. The contradictory public statements of the father of the minor—first asserting the accused’s presence and thereafter alleging his absence and a kidnapping by three unknown boys—completely demolish the prosecution version, more so when these statements are inconsistent with the FIR itself. Independent CCTV footage conclusively establishing the accused’s presence at home at the relevant time constitutes strong exculpatory evidence which has been ignored. Mechanical judicial remand without considering these vital aspects reflects non-application of mind. The appropriate remedy lies in immediately moving a regular bail application highlighting illegal arrest and contradictions, filing a petition before the High Court under Section 482 CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution seeking quashing of proceedings and protection of personal liberty, and seeking departmental action against erring officials. The case, on the face of record, appears motivated and legally unsustainable.

Advocate Neha Gupta LawRato

536 votes

The accused can file a bail application along with supporting evidence and documents, clearly mentioning the grounds of bail, including the contradictory statements made by the complainant and other witnesses.

Advocate Aditi Vashistha LawRato

795 votes

This a serious situation so contact any advocate in your locality and prefer a known or criminal advocate for assistance. Police will take time to investigate the offence. Your evidence helps you in the court and the changing statement of father of girl weekens the case. But there is suffering in such matters in hands of police and in courts.

Advocate Ashish Deswal LawRato