Minor sexually assaulted: Court pulls up Chandigarh Police for delay in lodging FIR, child’s counselling

The sexual assault had occurred on the intervening night between September 11 and 12, but the FIR was registered on only September 17; further, the child was taken to a counsellor only on November 2

A fast-track court has pulled up the Chandigarh Police for their investigation in a case of sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl, observing that there was a delay in registering the FIR and in providing counselling to the child.

While rejecting the bail application of the accused, the court observed, “Let a copy of this order be sent to the UT senior superintendent of police for informing him about the manner the investigating agency has worked in the present sensitive case related to the minor victim.” (HT)

The court of additional district and sessions judge Swati Sehgal made these observations while hearing the bail application of the accused, a resident of Sector 25-B, currently lodged in Model Jail, Sector 51, which was eventually rejected.

As per the judgment, the perusal of the police file reveals that the incident had occurred on the intervening night between September 11 and 12 this year, but the FIR was only registered on September 17 for reasons to be explained by the investigating officer. Eight days after the registration of the FIR, and 14 days after the incident, the statement of the minor victim was taken under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal procedure. She was taken for medical examination on September 28 and it was only on November 2 that she was taken to a counsellor.

Taking note of the same, the court observed, “The aforesaid speaks volume about the investigation conducted by both the investigating officers in the present case.”

While rejecting the bail application of the accused, the court further observed, “Let a copy of this order be sent to the UT senior superintendent of police for informing him about the manner the investigating agency has worked in the present sensitive case related to the minor victim.”

A case under Sections 452 (house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrong­ful restraint) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 8 (sexual assault) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was registered at the Sector 11 police station after the child’s father complained that the accused had trespassed into their house at night.

The accused was allegedly wearing a mask and threatened to kill the girl with a knife if she screamed. Her elder sister witnessed the incident and raised the alarm, following which the accused fled. He was later arrested on identification by the 14-year-old.

The counsel for the accused, during his bail hearing, had argued that he was being falsely implicated and was not in Chandigarh on the day of the incident, claiming that he had purchased a train ticket to go to Saharanpur from the railway station at 7 pm and had later left on the train at 9 pm. They asked that the CCTV footage of railway station and cell tower location of the accused be preserved.

The prosecution, meanwhile, said the accused already had a case under Section 411 (dishonestly receiving stolen property) registered against him and should not be granted bail as he may try to threaten the minor girl as he lived in her vicinity. As such, the court dismissed his regular bail application.