Madras HC impleads District Crime Branch inspector in ‘abuse’ case

MADURAI: The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court suo motu impleaded the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, in a sexual abuse case.

A Neelakandan, the petitioner from Surandai, Tenkasi district, sought the intervention of the Court to quash an FIR filed by the Alangulam All Women Inspector of Police, Tenkasi, under Section 528 BNSS, citing it as illegal.

The petitioner's counsel by referring to the provisions under Section 176 of BNSS, submits that in a case of rape, there’s no necessity for the victim to be called to the police station for the purpose of recording a statement and it can be enquired at the residence of the victim itself.

In this case, three different complaints were lodged by the de facto complainant. Those complaints were investigated by the police officials and the same have also been closed. While so, on the very same set of facts, another complaint couldn’t be entertained by the respondent police. He also submits that a final report has been filed mechanically.

The counsel for the de facto complainant furnished certain WhatsApp conversations between the de facto complainant and the accused.

On February 9, 2023, when the de facto complainant took her son to the hospital, the accused came to her house, hugged her daughter and also kissed her.

Not only that, he also intimidated her with a gun point that if she revealed the same to anybody, then he would kill the de facto complainant and her daughter. Therefore, the victim, afraid of it, did not disclose to anyone at that point of time and when she was taken to the office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, on seeing the accused, she fainted and was admitted to a private hospital in Surandai on December 27, 2023.

She had revealed that the incident happened on February 9 in 2023. A bunch of statements were also filed before the court on the side of the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant also claimed that her son died due to health issues in the interregnum period.

Justice B Pugalendhi in his order said, therefore, the court is of the view that the initial investigation conducted on the de facto complainant's complaints dated December 6, 2023 and on January 4 in 2024, was not conducted fairly and properly. The court expects the investigation agency to record statements from those investigation officers for the reasons, for treating the complaint of the de facto complainant, that too, on sexual harassment, in such a casual manner and the reasons for closing the complaints, when there are sufficient materials and also when the complaints constitute a cognizable offence. The conduct of the investigation officer should be dealt with departmentally. However, before passing an order, this court is inclined to provide an opportunity to the then-investigating officer. The Court posted the matter for final orders on August 25.