The Allahabad High Court has raised eyebrows, questioning how former Samajwadi Party (SP) lawmaker Rameshwar Singh Yadav could be accused of a 2016 rape in Etah when evidence suggests he was attending the legislative assembly in Lucknow at the time. The court has demanded an explanation from the Uttar Pradesh police regarding the chargesheet filed against Yadav and others, which includes serious allegations under the Indian Penal Code, POCSO Act, and SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act.
A division bench, comprising Justices Siddhartha Varma and Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, expressed astonishment over the claims and requested a personal affidavit from the Investigating Officer. The bench asked how the investigation concluded Yadav’s presence in Etah during the incident, especially given the alleged victim’s testimony that has been described as “planted” by parties with animosity towards Yadav and his brother, Jugendra Singh Yadav, another primary accused.
The defense presented attendance sheets from the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly, placing Yadav in Lucknow on the day of the alleged crime, January 29, 2016. They argued it was implausible for him to travel 370 kilometers from Lucknow to Etah and commit the crime at 9:30 AM. Furthermore, the defense highlighted the questionable delay in the filing of the complaint—over seven years after the alleged incident—and suggested that the case might be a fabrication.
In a related twist, the High Court has granted bail to Jugendra Singh Yadav due to the delayed registration of the case without a satisfactory explanation. The court has protected the petitioners from coercive actions until the next hearing, scheduled for August 14, with Rameshwar Singh Yadav’s bail plea set for August 16.
As the legal proceedings continue, the court’s demand for clarity from the police and the defense’s strong alibi claims have set the stage for a dramatic unfolding in this controversial case.
