Jharkhand High Court
Ors vs . State Of Karnataka [(2010) 7 Scc 263] As ... on 16 October, 2020
Author: Ravi Ranjan
Bench: Chief Justice, Sujit Narayan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(PIL) No. 1530 of 2020
...
Court on its own motion Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... Respondent
------
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
------
For the State : Mr. Sachin Kumar, A.A.G.-II
------
Oral Order
09 / Dated : 16.10.2020
1. With consent of the parties, hearing of the matter has been done through video conferencing and there is no complaint whatsoever regarding audio and visual quality.
2. Heard the parties.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh and Officer-in- Charge of the concerned case both are present before us through video conferencing.
4. From the materials which are available on record till date, we are totally dissatisfied with the investigation which is done in this case. From the affidavit dated 06.10.2020 it appears that the deponent is pleading the case of the accused person in such a manner as if he is a defence lawyer in a criminal trial. For example, it is stated in paragraph-5 as under:
"5. That it is stated and submitted that present case is not a simple copy book style case of acid attack rather it's an unique case having a lot of marked contradictions in case of prosecution on the basis of which probability of false implication of accused cannot be ruled out."
(Emphasis is ours) 2
5. There are several other statements made in this affidavit which indicate that the deponent is pleading the case of the accused person rather than making investigation regarding the allegations set up by the informant as informed by her in the First Information Report and the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has clearly supported the substance of the accusation against the accused person but despite that the accused is scot-free. There is another interesting aspect of the matter as it appears that the statement of the victim girl after registering First Information Report was recorded by the police on 26.06.2020 but the Investigating Officer did not take care to get her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. immediately rather he has recorded statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of a third person namely, Kamlesh Rana, who appears to be the friend of the accused person, on the pretext that he took her for treatment. When the question was put to the Superintendent of Police and the Investigating Officer in this proceeding that why the girl's statement was not recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. then, subsequently, on 10.08.2020, the statement of girl was recorded in which she has clearly supported the substance of accusation. There is yet an another angle in this matter as it would appear from the materials available on record that the police has taken consent of the accused person, who is much cooperative to the police, that he can be put to polygraph test and the police has obtained nod of the concerned Court in the form of a letter from the POCSO Court. But the question would be whether the accused was produced before the court, whether his consent has been recorded by the Court and whether the court had 3 put a question from the accused before issuing such letter for polygraph test that the outcome of the polygraph test can be utilized against him during trial? The answer has to be in negative because neither the accused has been arrested nor produced before the concerned court. The court below was also asked a question as to under what circumstances he has written a letter that the police can go for polygraph test and the concerned Judge has sent reply stating therein that the said letter was issued in terms of the guidelines and observations given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. Selvi & Ors Vs. State of Karnataka [(2010) 7 SCC 263] as well as the observation given by the High Court of Gujarat in Jaya Arjana Dangar Vs. State of Gujarat [(2018) Cri. 6403]. It is also apparent from the report that the letter was issued on the basis of a letter written to the police by the accused person that he is ready for polygraph test but whether that would be sufficient without production of the accused before the court and without consent of the accused given before the court concerned which has also got a duty to inform the accused that the same may be utilized against him? Can such letter be issued in place of passing a judicial order allowing polygraph test?
6. In the above view of the matter, prima facie, it appears to us that the investigation is not going in right direction, however, no final opinion can be made without looking into the entire materials collected during the course of investigation.
7. Accordingly, let the entire case diary in original of the investigation done in this matter be produced before this Court for our perusal.
4
8. The Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh as well as the Officer-in-Charge would remain present before this Court on the next date of hearing through video conferencing.
9. Let Ms. Aprajita Bhardwaj, learned counsel, upon whose e-mail received by us, suo motu cognizance has been taken in this case, assist this Court.
10. Put up this matter on 20.10.2020.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, C.J.) (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) VK/AKT