Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, who expressed curiosity about how the Investigating Officer had charged Yadav and others.The Court was informed that the victim was “planted” in the case by individuals hostile to the former lawmaker and his brother, Jugendra Singh Yadav, both main accused. It was claimed that evidence was fabricated and the case was lodged over seven years after the alleged incident.
Allahabad: Recently, the Allahabad High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh police to clarify how they concluded that former Samajwadi Party (SP) lawmaker Rameshwar Singh Yadav was guilty of rape in Etah, despite claims he was in the legislative assembly in Lucknow at the time of the incident.
READ ALSO: “In Rape Cases, DNA Evidence Not Conclusive Proof”: Cal HC
The directive came from a division bench comprising Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, who expressed curiosity about how the Investigating Officer had charged Yadav and others.
“The Investigating Officer is to submit a personal affidavit by the next date of listing, explaining how he concluded that the main accused, Rameshwar Singh Yadav, was in Etah on the incident date and time,” the Court ordered on July 18.
The order followed a petition by co-accused Pramod Yadav and two others to quash the case filed by Etah police last year under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The incident allegedly occurred in 2016.
The Court was informed that the victim was “planted” in the case by individuals hostile to the former lawmaker and his brother, Jugendra Singh Yadav, both main accused. It was claimed that evidence was fabricated and the case was lodged over seven years after the alleged incident.
It was also argued that the 68-year-old Rameshwar Singh Yadav could not have committed the crime in his brother’s presence and was in the assembly in Lucknow at the time. Attendance records from the Legislative Assembly showing his presence in Lucknow on January 29, 2016, were submitted as evidence. The distance between Etah and Lucknow is 370 km, making it impossible for Yadav to have been in both places at the same time.
READ ALSO: Dalit Rape Case| Sentenced to Life Imprisonment for Minor Girl’s Rape in Uttar Pradesh
Surprised by these claims, the Court sought a police explanation and protected the petitioners from coercive action, stating,
“Since the matter is being considered, it is appropriate that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners until the next listing,”
with the next hearing set for August 14.
READ ALSO: Removing Minor Girl’s Innerwear, Getting Naked “Not Attempt to Rape”: Rajasthan HC
On July 25, the High Court granted bail to Jugendra Singh Yadav, noting the unexplained delay in filing the case. Justice Rajeev Mishra referenced the Division Bench’s order in his decision. Rameshwar Singh Yadav’s bail plea is pending, scheduled for hearing on August 16.
Case Title: Pramod Yadav And 2 Others vs State of UP And 2 Others
