The court upholds the investigative findings, establishing that allegations lack substantive merit based on evidence and witness testimony.

JUDGMENT

Dated : 20^th February, 2026 The de facto complainant in crime no.13/2025 of Palakkad Vanitha police station filed this W.P.(Crl) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for directing the 2^nd respondent to entrust further investigation in the above crime to a superior Officer not below the rank of DySP or to the Crime Branch. The above crime was registered alleging offence punishable under Section 64(2)(m) of BNS.

2. The prosecution case as revealed from the FIR is that the accused, who is a Yoga teacher, on 11.8.2024 at 11.00 p.m, while the de facto complainant was returning in his car after attending a happiness class at Muthukkurishi, committed rape upon her, captured the photo of her private part, threatened her using the photo, and again committed rape upon her at about 12.00 in the night on one day in a school at Chittoor, wherein DSN course was going on.

3. In this case the police after investigation filed a final report finding that the complaint is false. Aggrieved by the above finding, the de facto complainant preferred this W.P.(Crl).

4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the investigating officer without conducting a proper investigation reached the conclusion that the case is false, only to help the accused. Therefore, he prayed for ordering further investigation by a superior police officer or by the Crime Branch.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the petition on the ground that a detailed investigation was conducted in this case and it was found that there is no merits in the allegations raised in the FIR and that is why a refer report was filed. Therefore, he prayed for dismissing the writ petition.

6. One of the incidents alleged in the FI statement given by the de facto complainant is that on 11.8.2024 at about 11.00 p.m while she was returning to her residence in the car driven by the accused after attending a happiness class at Muthukkurishi, he took her to a lonely place and committed rape upon her, inside the said car. The investigation conducted in this case after verifying the CDR of the accused, revealed that the accused was not present at the alleged place of occurrence. The CDR of the accused shows that at 11.30 p.m 11.8.2024 the accused reached the place called Karimba, a distant place away from the alleged place of occurrence. The de facto complainant also could not identify the said place of occurrence.

7. As per the allegations in the FIS, the second incident occurred at about 12.00 at night while the de facto complainant was attending DSN course at Royal Indian school at Chittoor. From the statement of witnesses who attended the said course, it is revealed that at 12.00 night all the participants including the de facto complainant and the accused were present at the site of the campfire, at 12.00 at night on the alleged date of incident.

8. The wife of the accused produced before the investigating officer several WhatsApp messages sent by the de facto complainant and CCTV footage and on verifying the same, the investigating officer found that the de facto complainant was very fond of the accused and that she had taken all efforts to contact and see the accused. From the statement given by the husband of the de facto complainant, it is also revealed that the de facto complainant tried to contact the accused. He had further stated that on a previous occasion also the de facto complainant alleged that she was sexually abused by another person. When he came to know that the said incident occurred with the consent of the de facto complainant herself, the said case was settled, at his instance.

9. Th