Adverse judicial remarks against an Investigating Officer cannot be made without granting an opportunity for hearing, violating natural justice principles.

Judgment :

ANAND SHARMA, J.

1. Aggrieved by the adverse remarks recorded by the Special Judge, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, No.4, Kota (Rajasthan) in its judgment dated 07.09.2021 against the petitioner, he has preferred the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that on FIR No.134/2019 was registered at Police Station Khatoli, District Kota (Rural) alleging therein that daughter of complainant aged in 17 years was missing since 25.05.2019 and one accused Hukam Singh had kidnapped her. Investigation after registration of the aforesaid FIR was handed over earlier to one Shri Puranmal and thereafter to the petitioner. During the investigation process, he recorded statement of witnesses, prepared the site plan, and also got the prosecutrix medically examined. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that the accused was known to her and on 24.05.2019, he took away the petitioner to Jodhpur and tried to forcibly solemnize the marriage but since she was minor, this should not be done, however, the accused established physical relations with her. On the basis of such investigation, charge-sheet was prepared by the petitioner under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against accused Hukam Singh for committing offences under Sections 363 , 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC , Section 5 (L)/6 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) & 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. After filing of the charge-sheet, cognizance was taken against the accused and charges were also framed against him for committing the aforesaid offences. During trial, the prosecutrix turned hostile and retracted from her earlier statement.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after such proceedings while passing the judgment of acquittal dated 07.09.2021, learned trial Court recorded following remarks against the petitioner:-

4. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the instant matter, the petitioner conducted investigation fairly and with due honesty and charge-sheet was filed on the basis of available evidence, however, only on account of conduct of the prosecutrix, charges could not be proved. It is submitted that there is no complaint against the petitioner with regard to adopting any unfair or illegal practice in the instant matter or of causing any undue gain and loss to any other party. Under these circumstances, without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to explain his conduct as well as to put forward his defence, only on the basis of assumptions the aforesaid remarks prejudicing the right in the interest of the petitioner as well as directing his higher authority to conduct the proper enquiry are causing serious prejudice and miscarriage of justice to the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that charge-sheet is prepared by the Investigating Officer on the basis of statements and evidence collected during investigation, which is placed before the higher authority of the police department and only on approval of the higher authority followed by the remarks of department of prosecution as well as learned Public Prosecutor, charge-sheet is filed before the Court. During the entire process, subsequent to proposal of charge-sheet on the basis of investig