'22 girls rape' case falls apart as complainant retracts allegations
Says she had left home of her own free will with a man

A sensational case involving allegations of rape of 22 girls and the kidnapping and sexual assault of a young woman collapsed in court after the complainant retracted her statement and termed the case fabricated.
A judicial magistrate allowed the woman to go with her husband after recording her statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in which she denied having been kidnapped or assaulted.
The court was informed that Sub-Inspector Robina Shaheen failed to produce any evidence to substantiate claims regarding the alleged rape of 22 girls.
In her statement, the woman said she had not been abducted and had left home of her own free will with a man identified as Naresh.
She told the court that the two were in a relationship and had entered into a marriage by choice.
Declaring the FIR baseless, she alleged that the police were harassing both her and her husband.
Upon inquiry by the court, the woman said she wished to live with her husband, adding that both families had no objections to the marriage.
After recording her statement, the magistrate permitted her to leave with her husband and directed the accused to furnish a surety bond of Rs50,000 as a safeguard.
According to police, a case had been registered at the Napier police station.
Meanwhile, the woman's mother, Shakundala, confirmed that her daughter had contracted a love marriage and was not kidnapped.
She said she had filed a missing person report when her daughter went untraceable.
"What happened afterward, only God knows. No one asked me what I wanted," she said, adding that the couple had informed her of their marriage at a temple. However, she expressed dissatisfaction and said she would have the marriage solemnised again.
She also said that a compromise had since been reached between the two families.


















COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ