ORDER :

1. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.368/2022 registered at Police Station – Akaltara, District – Janjgir – Champa (C.G.) for alleged commission of offences under Section 341, 354- D and 506, 509(B) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short POCSO Act).

2. The allegation against the present applicant is that the prosecutrix is a minor and during the period from 30/12/2021 to 19/08/2022, the applicant used to follow her while going to school or market and used obscene talks and gave obscene signals and when the victim said that she would inform her father, the applicant threatened her of dire consequences and also threatened to abduct her from her school on 17/08/2022.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argued that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the present applicant and father of the victim / complainant belongs to rival political party and there is dispute between them in relation to the political dominance in the village. He further submits that because of the said rivalry, the father of the complainant / victim did not like that the applicant should talk to the complainant / victim and despite of the warning to the victim, he saw that the applicant and the complainant / victim used to maintain talking terms and it is submitted that he created pressure on the complainant to lodge this false complaint against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is a respected member of the society and his arrest would lead to irreparable loss to his image in the public. He submits that investigation is complete, charge sheet has been filed, therefore, custodial interrogation may not be necessary. He relies upon judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P., AIR 1994 SC 1349 in which, it has been observed that -

“24. The above guidelines are merely the incidents of personal liberty guaranteed under the Constitution of India. No arrest can be made because it is lawful for the police officer to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing. The justification for the exercise of it is quite another. The police officer must be able to justify the arrest apart from his power to do so. Arrest and detention in police lockup of a person can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent for a police officer in the interest of protection of the constitutional rights of a citizen and perhaps in his own interest that no arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bona fides of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the person's complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. The recommendations of the Police Commission merely reflect the constitutional concomitants of the fundamental right to personal liberty and freedom. A person is not liable to arrest merely on the suspicion of complicity in an offence. There must be some reasonable justification in the opinion of the officer effecting the arrest that such arrest is necessary and justified. Except in heinous offences, an arrest must be avoided if a police officer issues notice to person to attend the Station House and not to leave the Station without permission would do.”

He submits that there is no physical assault committed by the applicant on the victim / complainant. They were in only talking terms and used to exchange messages which was not liked by her father and despite of warning given, the victim continued to maintain relationship with the applicant. Therefore, it is