Madras HC orders CBI probe into sexual abuse of minor after her parents allegedly thrashed by police, audio of victim’s statement leaked

Justice SM Subramaniam And Justice V Sivagnanam asked the CBI to take over the case as the court was not satisfied with the manner in which the investigation was being conducted by the state police. The court noted that the examination of the victim took place in the busy corridors of Kilpauk Government Medical College and that her parents were allegedly beaten at the police station while the alleged accused was allocated a chair to sit .

“We are not satisfied with the way the case was filed. We have no choice but to transfer the investigation from the state police to the CBI. This court cannot conduct a roving inquiry into the controversial question of facts before us from both sides. We have come to the irresistible conclusion that the entire case files need to be transferred to the Joint Director of CBI for further investigation and taking all appropriate action under the law,” the court said.

The court also noted that the video and audio of the witness’s interrogation had been posted online and instead of tracking down the person who had shared the files in the first place, the police had simply registered FIRs against a Youtuber and a journalist who shared the files. records and who spoke about the incident.

“The FIR only against the Youtuber and the journalist is not supported by the court. This would not serve the purposes of the Act. The police should find the root cause of the publication and arrest the people who leaked the information. The practice of registering complaints against journalists and YouTubers who all air their grievances in the public domain is not in line with the democratic principles set out in the constitution. Freedom of the press must under no circumstances be deprived“, the court observed.

Considering the financial condition of the victim’s parents, the court also ordered an interim compensation of Rs. 1 Lakh enabling them to maintain their livelihood and contest the case.

Background

The case concerns the sexual abuse of a 10-year-old girl. The court was told that the child’s parents, after noticing a bad smell, took her to a nearby doctor who informed them that the girl had been sexually abused. The doctor then referred her to Kilpauk Medical College. The KMC duty doctor examined the child and also informed the Child Welfare Committee and the women’s police station.

The petitioner’s lawyer Sampath Kumar submitted that the minor victim’s statement was recorded at 1 am in the corridors of KMC Hospital near the lift. He also informed the court that the victim’s parents were not present while the statements were recorded. It was further alleged that the statements were recorded and later circulated on social media and in newspapers.

Raising serious allegations against the procedure followed by the police, the petitioners claimed that the accused was made to sit on a chair at the police station while the victim’s father and mother were beaten up. The petitioner’s lawyer argued that the investigation was conducted unfairly and that the victim would not get justice.

The public prosecutor, however, opposed these allegations and considered that the investigation was carried out correctly. He informed the court that FIRs were already registered against the YouTuber and the journalist who released the video recording made by the inspector.

The court, however, was not satisfied with the progress of the investigation. The court noted that although the victim had named the accused in her statements, he was only arrested after 12 days. The court noted that even according to the statement of the nurse at KMC Hospital, the victim’s mother was not available with her when her statements were recorded. The court also expressed displeasure that the police had registered the FIRs only against the YouTuber and the journalist for releasing the video and not against the police officers who had recorded the video on their mobile phones or who were responsible for the leak of the video.

The court thus noted that prima facie, the procedure followed by the police was not in compliance with the POCSO Act. The court added that police must be more sensitive when dealing with child victims of sexual abuse. The court also noted that the manner in which the case was handled had disturbed the conscience of the court and required further investigation.

“Current facts disturb our mind and our conscience. We cannot say that the victim’s account of the facts is completely foreign. We must also consider their argument which arouses suspicion in the mind of the court. The action taken violates the provisions of the POCSO Act. The manner in which the victim was treated, a statement taken at midnight in the common corridor of the public hospital, is a serious matter that deserves further investigation. How they were treated should also be taken into consideration“, said the court.

The court therefore deemed it appropriate to transfer the investigation to the CBI.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 372

Case Title: Suo Motu v Deputy Commissioner of Police

Case No: HCP 2408 of 2024