How was ex-MLA charged with rape when he was in assembly at the time of incident? Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently directed the Uttar Pradesh police to explain how it had concluded that the former Samajwadi Party (SP) lawmaker Rameshwar Singh Yadav was guilty of rape in Etah when he is said to have been present inside the legislative assembly at Lucknow at the time of alleged incident [Pramod Yadav And 2 Others vs State of UP And 2 Others]..The division bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra said the Court was curious to know how the Investigating Officer had submitted a chargesheet against the accused persons including the former Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA). “The Investigating Officer to submit his personal affidavit by the next date of listing indicating in what manner he had concluded that the main accused Rameshwar Singh Yadav was at Etah on the date and time of the incident,” the Court ordered on July 18..The order was passed in a petition moved by the co-accused Pramod Yadav and two others for quashing of the case registered by the police in Etah district last year under various provisions of Indian Penal Code, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) and Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.The incident is alleged to have taken place in 2016.The Court was told that the victim had been “planted” in the case at the instance of some persons inimical to former lawmaker and his brother Jugendra Singh Yadav - who are the main accused in the case.It was also submitted that there was fabrication of evidence by the informant’s side and that the case had been lodged after a delay of over seven years..It was also argued that the former SP MLA was 68 years old at that time and “would not dare to commit the crime in the presence of his own brother”.Interestingly, it was also argued that Rameshwar Singh Yadav on the relevant date was attending the assembly in Lucknow.“This fact has been sought to be proved by bringing on record the Attendance Sheets of the Legislative Assembly, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and those sheets have been filed from page nos.118 to 128 of the writ petition. The evidence on record shows that the assembly had commenced at 9:30 AM on the relevant date i.e. on 29.1.2016 and the incident is alleged to have taken place in the morning at 9:30 AM of the same date. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the distance which parts Etah and Lucknow is 370 kms. and it is not physically possible for the main accused Rameshwar Singh Yadav to have reached Lucknow after commission of crime at 9:30 AM,” it was submitted..Finding the claim surprising, the Court sought explanation from the police and also protected the petitioners from coercive action.“Since the matter is being considered, we consider it appropriate that till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in the aforesaid case,” it ordered while listing the matter on August 14..In a related development, the High Court on July 25 granted bail to Jugendra Singh Yadav on the ground that there was inordinate delay in registration of the case with no explanation for it by the victim. Justice Rajeev Mishra in the order also took note of the Division Bench’s order. Rameshwar Singh Yadav’s bail plea is pending before the High Court and listed for hearing on August 16..Senior Advocate Manish Tiwari along with advocates Anurag Vajpeyi and Shristi Gupta represented the petitioners.Additional Advocate General PC Srivastava represented the State..[Read Order]