Madras High Court
U.Vasuki vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 January, 2015
Author: M.M.Sundresh
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, M.M.Sundresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06..01..2015 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.P. No.32062 of 2014 U.Vasuki ..Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Secretary to Government Home Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 115. 2.The Director General of Police Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. 3.The Superintendent of Police Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri. 4.The Additional Director General of Police CBCID, Pantheon Road, Egmore 600 008. ..Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to transfer the investigation of this case in hand to the 4th respondent CBCID, to enforce all the relevant provisions of the POCSO Act and Rules in this case and to grant compensation of 5 lakhs to each of the four victims and to direct the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights to monitor the case. ----------- For Petitioner :: Mr.N.G.R.Prasad for Ms.U.Nirmalarani For Respondents :: Mr.S.T.S.Moorthy Government Pleader O R D E R
(Judgment of Court was made by The Honourable Chief Justice) On the CBCID taking over the investigation, the facts as emerges from paragraph-11 of the status report filed on behalf of the fourth respondent/CBCID is as under;
11.Therefore, it is submitted that CBCID investigation ascertained that on 08.10.2014 at about 4.00p.m the aforesaid police constable Tr.A.Vadivel picked up the victim women Mrs.Kamalesh and Mrs.Ramkali and their relative's children Ganga and Poonam aged about 12 years and 13 years respectively, under suspicion it is also ascertained that he took them to police control room, Hosur and in the guise of interrogation or examination, he beat them, touched their body, outraged their modesty and forcefully robbed their money. Therefore, he was arrested on 29.12.2014 at about 14.00 hours, and he was interrogated in the presence of two official witnesses. Further, on the basis of his confession, a bunch of printed notice, said to have been circulated by the victims on 08.10.2014 at the bus stand, Hosur, for collecting money were seized under a custody. At present, he is lodged at Sub Jail, Hosur. His arrest was intimated to his father and family and also to the department, in which he was working. It is submitted that the accused Tr.A.Vadivel admitted his guilt in the presence of witnesses.
2. It is stated that the investigation is under process and the victim children are not in the State, but attending school elsewhere, are to be examined further. The appointment of Judicial Officer has been sought from Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri, to conduct Test Identification Parade and to record statements of the victim witnesses under Section 164(5) of Cr.P.C. Necessary action is said to have been taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri.
3. In view of what is stated and extracted in paragraph-11 above, the constable had been arrested and remanded to Judicial Custody.
4. In a separate affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, it has been stated that as per G.O., dated 31.01.1998, a sum of Rs.1 lakh is proposed to be sanctioned for each of the four victims.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, drawn our attention to the notification dated 30.11.2013 issued by the Tamil Nadu Government in terms of thereof, the amount of compensation has been specified at Rs.3 lakhs. Placing reliance upon the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in MOHD. HAROON AND OTHERS V. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER (W.P.(Criminal) No.155 of 2013) and In Re: Indian Woman says gang-raped on orders of Village Court published in Business and Financial News dated 23.01.2014 (Suo motu writ petition (Criminal) No.24 of 2014) and also the decision of this Court in P.RAJAKUMARI V. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (PRISONS) AND OTHERS (W.P.No.23320 of 2014 Dated 24.09.2014), the learned counsel has submitted that appropriate compensation will have to be paid. By taking into consideration of the facts of the case, a submission has been made that the rehabilitation of the victim is constitutional right. As the offence alleged is a congnizable, the learned counsel contended that the Station Officer had no choice except to register the complaint given at the earliest point of time instead of keeping it pending. A further submission has been made stating that the respondents have not taken into consideration of the amended provisions with respect to the definition of rape. Seeking to canvass the rights of the victim, reliance has been made on the judgment rendered by this Court in SATHYAVANI PONRANI V. SAMUEL AND ANOTHER (Crl.O.P.(MD) No.5474 of 2010).
6. Learned Government Pleader states that this matter will be looked into and amount would be paid to the victims as per the Government Notifications within a maximum period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. Considering the submissions made, we are of the view that the victims are entitled to the compensation as specified in the Government Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.1055 Home (Police-XII) dated 30.11.2013. We also make it clear that the victims are entitled for the maximum amount of compensation specified therein at Rs.3,00,000/-. We are also of the view that the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on the fixation of compensation were rendered based upon the peculiar facts involved therein. Further, there was no Government Order as available in the present case. More over, in those cases, complaints have already been registered for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC.
8.Learned Government Pleader, on instruction, submitted that the investigation is yet to be completed and therefore, appropriate sections of the Indian Penal Code would be added at the time of filing final report by taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case that are necessary. While doing so, the amended provisiona made to the code would also be taken into consideration.
9.The said statement made is also recorded.
10.Taking into consideration of the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, the amount as indicated above payable to the victims will have to be paid by the respondents within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that this payment has no relevancy to the fixation of fine or compensation that may likely be passed by the jurisdictional Court when such a situation arise.
11. We are of the view that the aforesaid can be the final direction in this writ petition, but we will monitor the matter at least till final report is filed in the Court so that necessary directions can be issued for a quick and speedy trial in the matter is of this nature.
12. The writ petition stands accordingly disposed of. No costs.
13. Learned Government Pleader on instruction states that the final report will be filed within one month.
14. List for compliance on 16.02.2015.
(S.K.K.,CJ.) (M.M.S., J.) 06.01.2015
Ksr/raa
To
1.The Secretary,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Home Department, Fort St.George,
Chennai 600 115.
2.The Director General of Police
Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.
3.The Superintendent of Police
Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.
4.The Additional Director General of Police
CBCID, Pantheon Road,
Egmore 600 008.
The Hon'ble The Chief Justice
and
M.M.Sundresh, J.
(ksr/raa)
W.P. No.32062 of 2014
06..01..2015