Police Must Find Out Real Accused Providing Sensitive Information In POCSO Cases Instead Of Registering Cases Only Against Journalist: Madras HC
The Madras High Court said that the Police must find out the real accused who provides sensitive videographs and information in cases of sexual offences against the child, instead of registering criminal cases only against the Journalist.
The Court was dealing with two petitions. First one was the suo motu petition initiated by the Court at the instance of an Advocate and another was the habeas corpus petition instituted by the mother of the victim minor girl.
A Division Bench comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice V. Sivagnanam observed, “Practice of registering cases only against the Journalists and Youtubers leaving the real accused, is with an idea to cause threat to the Freedom of Press. Freedom of Press being a Constitutional Right, it cannot be compromised. Whenever such nature of publications are made, police are expected to find out the real accused, who provided such videographs and information to the Journalist instead of registering criminal cases only against the Journalist.”
Advocate R. Sampath Kumar appeared for the petitioner (victim’s mother) while State Public Prosecutor (SPP) Hasan Mohamed Jinna appeared for the respondents.
In this case, a petition was filed to issue a writ of habeas corpus, directing the respondent police, particularly the Deputy Commissioner of Police to produce the minor girl before the Court and hand over to the parents, to provide medical treatment to the victim minor girl to give proper protection to her and her family, to provide adequate compensation to her as per the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POSCO Act), and to initiate disciplinary proceedings/suitable action against the erring police officials. Advocate A.P. Surya Prakasam, in his letter, had stated that the victim minor girl aged about 10 years was a rape victim and her parents were allegedly tortured by the Inspector of Police.
It was further stated that the victim was to be examined by the Medical Board and to be referred for counselling through experts and compensation was to be paid. He said that the police officers guilty of committing such atrocities upon the minor victim girl and her parents are to be suitably punished. Along with the letter, he relied on certain newspaper publications which revealed that "Cop beats minor rape survivor's parents; Culprit not yet arrested” etc.
The High Court in the above regard, noted, “The subsequent criminal cases registered against one Youtuber and one Journalist cannot be appreciated by this Court. The publications are made, on receipt of the videograph or information. Therefore, the police are expected to conduct a thorough enquiry and identify the persons, who all are the real accused disclosed the audio and video to the Journalist. Thus, merely registering a case against the Journalist would do no service to the cause of justice.”
The Court further remarked that the procedures followed by the respondent-Police and treating the minor victim girl and her parents in the Police Station and Hospital are directly in violation of the provisions of the POCSO Act and the procedures established to conduct investigations.
“The actions of the respondent / Police raises serious doubts and suspicion in the mind of this Court. The victim side absolutely lost their confidence on Police regarding the investigation conducted”, it added.
Considering the principle “Justice must be seen to be done” and the victim side lost their confidence on the Police, on account of the ill-treatment caused to them and violations of the procedures contemplated under POCSO Act, the Court said that it found enough reasons to consider the case of the minor victim girl.
“Thus, we have no option, but to transfer the present investigation from the Tamil Nadu State Police to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)”, it also observed.
The Court, therefore, directed the respondents to provide necessary police protection to the victim girl and her family, enabling them to lead peaceful and safe life.
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the petitions.
Cause Title- Suo Motu v. The Deputy Commissioner of Police & Anr.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate R. Sampath Kumar
Respondents: SPP Hasan Mohamed Jinna and APP E. Raj Thilak.
