The court ruled for the immediate arrest of a politically influential accused in a sexual assault case to ensure justice, protect victims, and maintain public confidence in the legal process.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 41, 156(3) - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 3 and 4 - Allegations of rape and custodial violence - High Court ordered immediate arrest of the accused, including a Member of Legislative Assembly, accused of raping a minor and linked to the custodial death of the victim's father, citing the necessity to prevent further coercion and tampering with evidence - No FIR was initially filed against the MLA despite allegations due to his influence over police and state machinery, highlighting systemic failures in protection of victims (Paras 6, 10, 18, 31).

(B) Criminal Law and Procedure - Interference of High Court in investigation - Court held that failure to arrest a powerful accused without sufficient justification violates the fundamental rights of the victim and undermines public confidence in the legal system (Paras 17, 29, 30).

(C) Investigation Protocol - Emphasized need for prompt and fair investigations, particularly in heinous offenses such as sexual assault against minors, with instructions for the involvement of the CBI to ensure impartial inquiries (Paras 23, 32).

Facts of the case:
The case involved allegations against a politician for rape and his intimidation of witnesses leading to the death of the prosecution's father. The prosecution struggled to file complaints owing to political influence and subsequent threats.

Findings of Court:
Immediate arrest of accused ordered to restore faith in law enforcement and for a fair investigation.

Issues: The legality of arresting influential persons in cases involving severe crimes when evidence exists.

Ratio Decidendi: Court underscored that laws should proactively protect victims from systemic abuse and highlighted the importance of timely arrests in severe cases.

Result: Court mandated immediate action against the accused, ensuring a comprehensive investigation.

Table of Content
1. initial presentation and registration of pil. (Para 1 , 2)
2. role of police and sit in investigation. (Para 3 , 9)
3. allegations against kuldeep singh and investigation failures. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
4. court's concern about law enforcement influence. (Para 10 , 27)
5. argument against arrest protocol and law enforcement responsibilities. (Para 11 , 12 , 14)
6. legal precedent on arrest and investigation protocols. (Para 15 , 16 , 19)
7. need for fair investigation and urgency. (Para 17 , 20)
8. decision on transferring investigation to cbi. (Para 21 , 22 , 30)
9. court orders immediate arrest and further investigation. (Para 31 , 32)

1. Heard Mr. Gopal S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, Amicus Curiae and learned Advocate General.

2. On 11 April 2018, Mr. Gopal Chaturvedi, at 10.00 a.m. presented a letter in the open Court with newspaper cuttings, drawing our attention to the incident at Unnao, where a minor girl was allegedly raped by a Member of Legislative Assembly, Mr. Kuldeep Singh Sengar. We immediately directed the office to register the letter as Public Interest Litigation. Our order dated 11.04.2018, reads thus:

“Mr. Gopal S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, presented a letter addressed to the Chief Justice, requesting to take a suo motu cognizance of the incident that has taken place in district Unnao, where a girl was allegedly raped by a Member of Legislative Assembly, Mr. Kuldeep Singh Sengar of Bangarmau Constituency and his aides. He submits that though the offence came to be registered on the basis of first information report lodged by father of the girl, naming Mr. Kuldeep Singh Sengar as main accused, the Investigating Agency has not arrested him till today.

What is disturbing, as submitted by Mr. Chaturvedi, is that the father of the prosecutrix, for no reason, came to be arrested and was in custody, where, we are informed, he was mercilessly beaten and succumbed to the injuries yesterday, i.e. 10.4.2018. We fail to understand why the Investigating Agency instead of arresting accused persons, they arrested complainant, in connection with this case.

We direct the office to register the letter of Mr. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate dated 11.4.2018 as PIL and place it before this Court tomorrow, as fresh matter. We also direct Mr. Ramanand Pandey, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State, to inform the Advocate General / Addl. Advocate General to appear in the case. We request Mr. Gopal S. Chaturvedi to appear in the case as Amicus Curiae.

S.O. to 12.4.2018. as fresh matter.”

3. Yesterday when the matter was taken up, learned Advocate General, assisted by Additional Advocate General Mr. Neeraj Tripathi with two top police officers, including the one who led the SIT constituted by the Government of Uttar Pradesh, with the entire record of cases were present in the Court. We have heard Mr. Gopal Chaturvedi and Advocate General at considerable length and with their assistance gone through the material to which our attention was drawn.

4. At the outset, learned Advocate General has informed the Court that First Information Report (FIR) was registered by mother of the prosecutrix, bearing Case Crime No. 0316, on 20 June 2017, for the offences under S.363, S.366 IPC, against Awdhesh Tiwari and Shubham. During investigation, one Brijesh Yadav along with the other named accused was taken into custody, and offence under S.376 - D IPC and 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) was added. The investigation in this case got over long back and accused have been charge - sheeted, thereafter, enlarged on bail. This FIR was in connection with the alleged incident of kidnapping and gang rape occurred during 11 June and 20 June 2017. It is not in dispute that the prosecutrix is minor - aged about 17 years and has studied upto sixth standard.

5. It appears, that according to the complaint and the prosecutrix, though they named Kuldeep Singh, MLA also in the said compla

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 Supreme(Online)(All) 58

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABADDilip B. Bhosale, CJ, Suneet Kumar, JIn Re- An Unfortunate Incident v. State of U. P.Crl. W. P. I. L. No. 1 of 2018

The court ruled for the immediate arrest of a politically influential accused in a sexual assault case to ensure justice, protect victims, and maintain public confidence in the legal process.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Dilip B. Bhosale, CJ, Suneet Kumar, J
In Re- An Unfortunate Incident v. State of U. P.
Crl. W. P. I. L. No. 1 of 2018