Back
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Rajesh Shankar, J.
Bodhi Pandit – Petitioner
versus
State of Jharkhand and Ors. – Respondents
W.P. (Cr.) No.143 of 2011
Decided on 2.2.2024
(A) Constitution of India – Article 226 – Kidnapping of girl child – Writ petition for issuance of direction upon Police to take legal action against named accused persons in case instituted for offence under Sections 366(A)/34 of IPC – Further prayer was made for taking necessary action to search daughter of original petitioner, who was allegedly kidnapped by accused persons – Protracted investigation and inadequate supervision – Ministry of Women & Child Development has formulated a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) on 23.11.2016 for dealing with cases of missing children as per directives of Supreme Court issued in case of Bachpan Bachao Andolan – SOP has been formulated to create mechanism and systems to prevent further victimization of missing children – It also envisages to ensure that appropriate and timely protection/care/attention is provided to victims/witnesses – SOP for cases of missing children defines roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders including police, Child Welfare Committees (CWCs) and Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs) – As per SOP, duty of police is that upon receipt of any complaint about missing child, FIR is to be registered forthwith as a case of trafficking or abduction and wide publication through different platforms has to be made about missing child – Sufficient number of ‘Hue and Cry’ notice containing photograph and physical description of missing child be prepared to be sent for publication – Areas and spots of interest such as movie theatres, shopping malls, parks, game parlours and areas where missing children can be identified and watched, be searched – Recordings of Close Circuit Television Cameras installed in vicinity of areas from where reports of missing children are registered and on all possible routes, transit and destinations be scanned. (Paras 14 to 17)
(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 366(A)/34 – Constitution of India – Article 226 – Kidnapping of girl child – Petition seeking direction for effective Police investigation – Present writ petition was filed after about one year of lodging of FIR – S.D.P.O. ignored last seen theory – Though FIR was lodged against named accused persons, they were not interrogated by taking them in police custody – Prompt action was needed to trace missing girl, however, investigating officer failed to do so – Charge-sheet was submitted after a huge delay and due to such protracted investigation, truth could not be surface – Steps for keeping Mobile Phones of accused persons and original petitioner along with petitioner on surveillance were taken after a huge delay, which is also one of reasons for no fruitful outcome – There are bundle of errors committed by Investigating Officer(s) as well as Sub-Divisional Police Officers, who were investigating and reviewing investigation of case due to which she could not be traced out in spite of several directions issued by High Court – If police do not play their role effectively and with due diligence, entire prosecution case is bound to fall in Court and ultimately victim does not get justice – It is imperative that police must perform its role effectively and diligently – It is not a case of faulty investigation simpliciter, but also demonstrates malignity and attempt to ensure that suspect can go scot-free. (Paras 18 to 21 and 24)
(C) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 193 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 366(A)/34 – Constitution of India – Article 226 – Crime investigation – Kidnapping of girl child – Petition seeking direction for effective Police investigation – Police are executive force of State which are entrusted with duty of maintaining law and order as well as peace and harmony in society – They also play a vital role in prevention and detection of crime – It is duty of police to live up to expectations of society – Rendering service in police force is not a profession, but a solemn duty to ensure peace and harmony in society as well as sense of security to people – Policemen while discharging duties and responsibilities, must avoid all temptations to have recourse to short-cuts and extra-legal methods – Concerned investigating officers and Supervising Officers/Sub-Divisional Police Officers have committed serious lapses and as such it would be appropriate to pass order for initiation of departmental proceeding against such erring investigating officers and Supervising Officers/Sub-Divisional Police Officers – D.G.P directed to get enquiry conducted and departmental proceedings initiated against other police officers/officials also, who are found to have failed in discharging their duties as police officers with due diligence, which resulted in not tracing victim girl even after 13 years of lodging of FIR – Directions issued. (Paras 27, 30 and 31)
Result: Elaborate directions issued.
JUDGMENT
The present writ petition was initially filed by Tekni Devi W/o Sri Teklal Pandit (hereinafter referred as the original petitioner) for issuance of direction upon the respondents, particularly, the Superintendent of Police, Giridih (the respondent No.2) to take legal action against the named accused persons of Bagodar (Sariya) P.S. Case No. 88 of 2010 dated 07.05.2010 instituted for the offence under Sections 366(A)/34 of IPC as the accused persons were roaming freely in the locality and were even seen with the local police. Further prayer was made for taking necessary action to search the daughter of the original petitioner, who was allegedly kidnapped by the accused persons.
2. Subsequently, after the death of the original petitioner, her brother, namely, Bodhi Pandit S/o Hiraman Pandit (hereinafter referred to as the present petitioner) has been substituted as the petitioner.
3. In the present case, Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate, was appointed as Amicus Curiae vide order dated 05.08.2022 to assist this Court.
4. Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned Amicus Curiae, and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
5. Learned Amicus Curiae has submitted written notes of argument in the present case highlighting the following key points with respect to different counter affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents and the qualitative assessments of the same:—
(i) The original petitioner, namely, Tekni Devi had lodged an FIR being Bagodar (Saria) P.S. Case No. 88 of 2010 on 07-05-2010 alleging that certain people belonging to her in-laws’ family had kidnapped her daughter, namely, Priti Kumari (hereinafter referred to as the victim girl) aged about 16 years, who was missing since 25.04.2010 and when the efforts to trace the victim girl did not make any headway, the original petitioner was constrained to file the present writ petition for promptly conducting the investigation.
(ii) The respondent No.3 filed a counter affidavit dated 10-02-2012 stating that after institution of the case, the investigation was taken up and the statements of various witnesses were recorded by the investigating officer. The statement of one Jageshwar Pandit, who happens to be the father-in-law of the informant, was recorded at Para 8 of the case diary from which it appeared that there was dispute regarding share in landed property of the witnesses resulting in institution of the case before the competent Court. Para 9 of the case diary was the statement of one Baijnath Ram, who had also stated about the dispute between the informant and accused persons with respect to share in the landed property. The said witness also stated that the victim girl was once caught having illicit relationship with her ‘Jija’. It was also stated that one of the accused persons, namely, Tulsi Pandit was asked by the victim girl to drop her at Chichaki Railway Station. Thereafter, he left her at the station and returned home. The other witnesses also did not support the case of the prosecution. In course of investigation, the statement of the informant’s husband, namely, Teklal Pandit @ Tiko Pandit was recorded at Para 46 of the case diary in which it was stated by him that the informant had instituted a false case against his family members. He had also stated that perhaps the informant under conspiracy had sold his daughter somewhere. The case was supervised by the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Bogodar-Sariya, Giridih, who mentioned in the supervision note that the case instituted under Section 366-A of IPC was found to be true, however, the allegation made against the accused persons was found to be false.
(iii) The qualitative assessment of the counter affidavit dated 10-02-2012 filed by the respondent No.3 would denote following pitfalls in the investigation of the case:-
“(A) Investigation commenced after lodging of the FIR on 07.05.2010, however, incident of missing the victim girl happened on 25.04.2010.
I. Rightful Action: Swift registration of
(1) Kidnapping of girl child – Petition seeking direction for effective Police investigation – If police do not play their role effectively and with due diligence, entire prosecution case is bound to....
The responsibility of police to conduct prompt, diligent, and transparent investigations is paramount, especially in cases of missing persons, ensuring public trust and justice.
The court established that missing person cases require urgent action and compliance with existing SOPs and legal obligations, emphasizing the presumption of abduction or trafficking.
Point of law: Magistrate's power Under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is very wide, for it is this judicial authority that must be satisfied that a proper investigation by the polic....
The duty of the Investigating Officer to find the truth, the powers of the Magistrate to ensure proper investigation, and the importance of fair and just investigation under Article 21 of the Constit....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a fair investigation and the dismissal of frivolous petitions aimed at interfering with the investigation process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
