The power to direct re-investigation is vested only with the Superior Courts, and the National Commission for Scheduled Castes does not have the jurisdiction to direct re-investigation.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records relating to criminal case in Spl. S.C.No.16 of 2020 pending on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Erode, quash the same by allowing this Criminal Original Petition.)

1. The petition is filed to quash the final report filed for the alleged offences under Section 352 IPC, Section 3 (1) (w) (i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 and Sections 9 (n) and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012.

2. It is alleged in the final report that the petitioner had misbehaved with the defacto complainant, who was working in the petitioner's house by touching the hands and breasts of the defacto complainant and thus he had committed the aforesaid offences.

3. Though the 2nd respondent has been served, none has appeared for the 2nd respondent. Therefore, this Court directed the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to instruct the 1st respondent to inform the defacto complainant about the pending proceedings. On instructions, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the 1st respondent had informed the defacto complainant about the pending proceedings. However, the defacto complainant has chosen not to appear before this Court.

4. a) Mr. N.Manokaran, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned final report is liable to be quashed mainly on the ground that the 1st respondent was not competent to file the impugned final report since, he had filed a final report earlier closing the case as “mistake of fact”. The 1st respondent had given elaborate reasons for coming to the said conclusion. While so, without any notice to the petitioner, the 1st respondent re-investigated the case and filed the impugned final report, which is diametrically opposite to the earlier report filed by him.

4. b) The learned counsel would further submit that the 1st respondent had no authority to re-investigate the case as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in number of cases, including the Judgement reported in 2016 (4) SCC 160 – Dharam Pal Vs. State of Haryana and others. Since the 1st respondent had violated the settled position of law, the impugned final report is liable to be quashed.

5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that pursuant to the closure report filed by the 1st respondent, it appears that one Nartharsha Malim.H, State Corordinator – Tamil Nadu, Bachpan Bachao Andolan - BBA had approached the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, complaining about the action taken by the 1st respondent in closing the case as “mistake of fact”. The National Commission for Scheduled Castes in their meeting held on 23.09.2019 observed that the 164 statement of victim child along with the other evidences of the child line volunteers prima facie discloses the commission of offences and also suggested that action should be taken against the Investigating Officer. The National Commission for Scheduled Castes further recommended that the case be re-investigated and the accused persons should be identified and arrested under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 . The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that therefore the 1st respondent Police had to re-investigate the case and file the impugned final report. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) further submitted that hence, the impugned final report cannot be quashed.

6. This Court on perusal of the impugned final report and the earlier closure report filed by the 1st respondent Police finds that the 1st respondent had given elaborate reasons for disbelieving the case of the de facto complainant. It is needless to state that the Investigating Officer shall not act as a mere Post Office. The purpose of the investigation is to ascertain th