The Supreme Court has refused to intervene in a case involving grave allegations of incest and sexual assault leveled by a daughter against her father—a former judicial officer—underscoring the disturbing nature of the charges and stating outright: “This is shocking.”
A Bench led by Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan was unmoved by arguments seeking to link the complaint to a sour matrimonial dispute. The Court found no ground to quash the charges, noting the seriousness of the accusations, which include multiple counts of sexual assault over a span of four years.
“She must have been scarred for life,” the Bench observed, reacting strongly to the nature of the allegations. “He is a judicial officer and these are serious allegations of incest. How can this be a case for quashing?”
The case originates from an FIR filed in Bhandara, Maharashtra, in January 2019. The events allegedly occurred between May 2014 and 2018, during the complainant’s childhood. The police have already filed a chargesheet under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act, including provisions dealing with repeated sexual assault and abuse by a relative.
The former judge challenged a Bombay High Court order refusing to quash the case, asserting before the apex court that the accusations were fabricated and timed to coincide with ongoing divorce proceedings and a custody battle. His counsel described the case as a retaliatory move by his estranged wife and argued that the complaint surfaced only after his father’s suicide in 2018—a death allegedly linked to family discord.
Despite pleas invoking personal tragedy and ruined reputation, the Court declined to entertain theories about motive or delay. “We don’t want to get into all this,” it said bluntly. “Suicide may be because of the son’s actions.”
The petitioner’s side also emphasized that earlier legal proceedings—including divorce and domestic violence cases—made no mention of such abuse. But the Bench found this insufficient to warrant quashing, instead directing a swift trial in the Special POCSO Court, where charges are still to be framed.
The Court’s firm stance suggests that in cases where allegations touch the core of personal violation, especially those involving children and familial trust, the legal system cannot afford to turn a blind eye—regardless of the accused’s stature or personal misfortunes.
