SHASHI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4826 of 2026

Shashi Devi
                                                              .....Appellant(s)
                                    Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)                :    Anand Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)               :    G.A., Mohd. Ashraf Abbasi

Court No. - 90
                     HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Mohd. Ashraf Abbasi, learned
counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 4, and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant criminal appeal has been filed seeking the following reliefs:

(i) Allow the present criminal appeal and set aside the impugned order dated
28.03.2026 passed by the learned Court of Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (P.A.)
Act, Moradabad, in respect of Final Report No. 175 of 2026, (Shashi Devi
Vs. Arif & Others), Police Station Sonakpur, District Moradabad.

(ii) Kindly be pleased to allow the appeal of the appellant filed under Section
156(3) Cr.P.C. and direct the lodging of the report against opposite party
nos. 2 to 4, otherwise the appellant shall be caused irreparable loss.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the final report
accepted by the learned trial court vide impugned order dated 28.03.2026 is
absolutely illegal and is liable to be set aside.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that appellant/complainant had filed an
application dated 25.10.2023 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against opposite
party nos. 2 to 4, stating that on 19.07.2023 at about 04:00 P.M., Arif, Ashiq
and Irfan, sons of Ishaq, residents of the village, entered the house of the
complainant. Immediately upon entering, Arif caught hold of the
complainant, embraced her, and threw her down. Ashiq caught hold of her
hands, while Irfan stuffed a cloth into her mouth, and thereafter, all three of
them, one after another, forcibly committed rape upon her. When she
resisted, they abused her by saying, "Sali Chamatti, we had been waiting for
                                                          CRLA No. 4826 of 2026
                                2


an opportunity for a long time and, after great difficulty, we got an
opportunity today," and kicked her on her waist and hips. In the meantime,
the complainant's father-in-law, Sompal, and brother-in-law, Harish,
returned home from the field. On seeing them, the aforesaid persons fled
from the spot after threatening the complainant with dire consequences and
death in case she made any complaint or took any legal action.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the
complainant initially submitted an application to the concerned authorities
on 21.07.2023, whereupon the concerned persons became annoyed and took
the complainant to the Women's Police Station, where she was intimidated
and threatened, and her and her husband's thumb impressions were forcibly
obtained on blank papers, after which they were sent away and no action was
taken. Thereafter, the complainant submitted a complaint to the DIG,
Moradabad, but no action has yet been taken by the police. The complainant
and her husband apprehend danger to their lives from the aforesaid persons.

6. It is further alleged that the appellant belongs to the Jatav caste, whereas
the accused persons belong to the Muslim Teli community, which falls under
the OBC category. One application bearing No. 475 of 2023, dated
21.08.2023, and another application bearing No. 506 of 2023, dated
18.10.2023, had earlier been dismissed for want of prosecution. It has,
therefore, been prayed that the Station House Officer, Police Station
Sonakpur, be directed to register the complainant's report and conduct an
investigation.

7. Learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 4 has contended that there is
no medical report of the appellant/complainant in support of her allegations.
The appellant is 33 years old and is a married lady. The final report has been
submitted, and the protest petition filed by the appellant has also been
rejected by the learned trial court.

8. Learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 4 has further contended that
the appellant had filed an application dated 21.07.2023 before the DIG,
Moradabad, for registration of the said offence. He has submitted that
thereafter, the complainant submitted an application before the Station
House Officer, Mahila Police Station, District Moradabad, mentioning
therein that she is the wife of Mukesh, a resident of Village Sujanpur, Police
Station Sonakpur, District Moradabad. She stated that the allegations made
                                                         CRLA No. 4826 of 2026
                                3


by her against Arif, Ashiq and Irfan, sons of Ishaq, regarding the
commission of rape upon her and the use of caste-related abusive words on
19.07.2023 in the evening were false. She further stated that she had
submitted the application under the influence and at the instance of someone
else. She stated that she was not educated and that having been tutored by
someone, she had made such allegations, which she would never repeat in
future. She requested that she may be forgiven.

9. Thereafter, Sub-Inspector Manoj Kumar of Police Station Sonakpur,
District Moradabad, submitted his report to the S.S.P., Moradabad, dated
16.08.2023, stating that the IGRS complaint had been inquired into by the
undersigned Sub-Inspector and that the following facts had emerged during
the inquiry. On being questioned, the complainant stated that she was not
educated and that no incident of rape, use of caste-related abusive words, or
any other such incident had been committed against her by Arif, Ashiq and
Irfan, sons of Ishaq, as mentioned above. She further stated that she had
submitted the application against the aforesaid three persons under the
influence and at the instance of others. She stated that she would not do so
again in future. She further stated that she had submitted a written apology
before the Mahila Police Station, District Moradabad. On being asked, the
persons residing in the neighbourhood also stated that no incident relating to
any offence had occurred with the complainant at the said place.
Accordingly, no further action was required on the aforesaid IGRS
complaint.

10. The aforesaid report was also submitted before the learned Special
Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, District Moradabad, in the said application under
Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., stating that there had been no incident either of rape
or of the use of any casteist remarks by opposite party nos. 2 to 4, and the
complainant herself had stated that no such incident had ever occurred.

11. Learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 4 has argued that on two
occasions, the applications filed by the complainant under Section 156(3)
Cr.P.C. were dismissed for non-prosecution by the complainant, and
thereafter she filed a fresh application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated
25.10.2023, which was also rejected.

12. Learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 4 has further argued that
thereafter the complainant preferred a criminal appeal before this Court and
                                                         CRLA No. 4826 of 2026
                                4


the matter was remanded. Thereafter, the F.I.R. was registered, the
investigation was completed, and the final report was submitted. The said
final report has already been accepted, and the protest petition filed by the
complainant was also rejected. Hence, the criminal appeal is liable to be
dismissed.

13. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the record, it transpires that opposite party nos. 2 to 4 are real
brothers, and it is highly improbable that they would commit such an act
with a married lady aged 33 years. Even thereafter, she did not undergo any
medical examination.

14. Learned trial court issued notice to the complainant, but despite service
of notice, she did not appear before the court and no objection was filed on
her behalf.

15. Learned trial court observed that perusal of the case diary accompanying
the final report, available on the record, shows that after conducting the
investigation, the Investigating Officer, having found no evidence against
the accused persons, submitted the final report. During the course of
investigation, Smt. Kamlesh, Prem Singh, Bahoran Singh, Ayyub, Danish,
Charan Singh, Shantilal, Mukesh Kumar and Ansar Ali submitted an
application before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moradabad, stating
therein that they knew Smt. Shashi Devi, wife of Mukesh Kumar, resident of
Village Sujanpur Thami Sonar, District Moradabad, very well and were fully
acquainted with her conduct. It was stated that Shashi Devi was in the habit
of filing false cases and implicating respectable and reputed persons of
society, and that she was taking undue advantage of her caste (Jatav) by
submitting false applications and attempting to extort money, in which her
husband, Mukesh Kumar, was also assisting her. It was further stated that
the present case was false and fabricated and that the accused persons were
completely innocent.

16. It was further stated that there had been previous litigation between the
family of the applicant and Arif, son of Ishaq, etc. The father-in-law of the
applicant had lodged Case Crime No. 140 of 2020 under Sections 323 and
504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(5-A) of the Scheduled Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against Arif, son of
Ishaq, and three others, which was also annexed with the investigation.
                                                          CRLA No. 4826 of 2026
                                5


17. In the inquiry report dated 03.08.2023 submitted by the Sub-Inspector,
Sonakpur, Smt. Shashi Devi is stated to have disclosed that she was illiterate
and that no incident of rape or use of caste-related abusive words had been
committed against her by Arif, Ashiq and Irfan, sons of Ishaq. She further
stated that she had got the case registered against the aforesaid three persons
at the instance of others and that she would not do so in future. She also
stated that all three accused, namely, Arif, Ashiq and Irfan, were completely
innocent.

18. The application submitted by appellant under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was
investigated by Sub-Inspector Subhash Chandra, Police Station Sonakpur,
District Moradabad. During the said inquiry, the persons residing in the
vicinity were questioned, who stated that no incident relating to any offence
had taken place with appellant.

19. It has further been contended that despite the aforesaid inquiries and
findings, the complainant, concealing the true facts and acting contrary to
her own apology, filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court at
Allahabad, pursuant to which the present case was registered. It was stated
that none of the offences alleged to have been committed had actually taken
place.

20. Having considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel
for the parties and the learned A.G.A. and having perused the material
available on record, it transpires that the allegations made by the
appellant/complainant against opposite party nos. 2 to 4 were duly
investigated by the police.

21. During the course of inquiry, the complainant herself stated that no
incident of rape or use of caste-related abusive words had been committed
against her by the accused persons and that the application had been
submitted at the instance and under the influence of others. She also
submitted a written apology before the Mahila Police Station. The
statements of persons residing in the neighbourhood were also recorded,
who did not support the alleged occurrence.

22. It further appears from the record that the Investigating Officer, after
considering the material collected during investigation, submitted the final
report. The learned trial court issued notice to the complainant, but she did
not appear and no objection was filed on her behalf. The learned trial court
                                                                                              CRLA No. 4826 of 2026
                                                                     6


                                    thereafter considered the case diary and the material collected during
                                    investigation and accepted the final report while rejecting the protest
                                    petition.

                                    23. Although learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the
                                    allegations made in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. disclose
                                    cognizable offences, mere allegations, in the facts of the present case, cannot
                                    be considered in isolation from the subsequent statements of the complainant
                                    and the material collected during investigation.

                                    24. This Court has also considered the fact that there was previous litigation
                                    between the parties. The material available on record, including the
                                    complainant's subsequent statement, the statements of the persons residing in
                                    the neighbourhood and the investigation report, does not disclose sufficient
                                    material warranting interference with the order passed by the learned trial
                                    court.

                                    25. The learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any
                                    manifest illegality, perversity or material irregularity in the impugned order
                                    dated 28.03.2026. The findings recorded by the learned trial court are based
                                    upon the material available on record and do not call for interference in
                                    exercise of appellate jurisdiction.

                                    26. Accordingly, this Court finds no substance in the present criminal
                                    appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with costs of Rs. 20,000/-. The
                                    impugned order dated 28.03.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge,
                                    S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Moradabad, is hereby affirmed.

                                    27. The appellant is directed to deposit the aforesaid costs before the District
                                    Legal Services Committee, Moradabad, within one month from today. In
                                    case of failure to deposit the aforesaid amount within the stipulated period,
                                    appropriate proceedings may be initiated against the appellant by the learned
                                    Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Moradabad.

                                    September 29, 2026
                                    M. Tarik
                                                                                                (Abdul Shahid,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
MOHD TARIK
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad