RAJWATI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been preferred by petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer that the investigation in FIR No. 237/2009 be transferred from the police of PS Jaitpur to any other Investigating Agency on the ground that police officials of PS Jaitpur were in connivance with respondents/accused persons. Notice of the petition was served on the State and counter affidavit filed by the State would show that an FIR No. 236/09 was registered under Section 363 IPC at the instance of respondent no.6 regarding kidnapping of one minor boy named Sanjay. The petitioner was working as domestic servant with the respondents the petitioner approached the Police Station on 23rd December, 2009 and complained that on 19th December, 2009 she was given beatings by respondents no. 6 & 7. She was sent for medical examination to AIIMS Trauma Center but before she could be examined by doctor she left the hospital. She approached Police Station again on 24th December, 2009 and she was again sent for medical examination. She was examined and the doctor opined that there were no visible external injuries. Since the petitioner had also complained that her teeth were pulled out by the respondents, she was referred to dental surgeon. The dentist examined her and asked her to come for follow up examination. She was told by police on 24th December, 2009 itself to make a statement but she told police that she would come next day and give her statement. On the next day i.e. on 25th December, 2009 she gave a statement to the police that on 18th December, 2009 she was called by Jahiruddin to his house in connection with some inquiry regarding kidnapping of his minor son where she was given beatings and her teeth were plucked. Apart from Jahiruddin, Volta, Anil and Bano also gave beatings to her and poured cold water and chillies on her. On the basis of this statement, a case FIR No. 237/09 under Section 323/342 read with Section 34 IPC was registered. The report of dental surgeon was collected. Dental Surgeon in his report opined that keeping in view the oral health of petitioner he was not able to comment whether her tooth was forcibly extracted or it had fallen off of its own. However, the police suspecting that tooth might have been forcibly extracted/plucked, converted the offence from Section 323 to Section 325 IPC. The four named accused persons i.e. respondents no. 6-9 were arrested, no incriminating evidence was found against other respondents.

(2.) CONSIDERING the counter affidavit filed by State, I come to the conclusion that investigation was conducted by the police in proper directions and there was no necessity of transferring the investigation. The petition is hereby dismissed.