RAJAN @ RAMU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an unusual litigation where the accused, who has been tried and acquitted in a case registered for offences punishable under Sections 305 and 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, seeks orders for further investigation in the case for the purpose of bringing the real culprit to justice.

(2.) The petitioner, his elder brother Mohanan and his elder sister Sarasamma were residing in adjoining houses. Mohanan had a daughter named Arya, aged 13 years. She committed suicide on 2.2.2015 by hanging herself in a tree near her house. The deceased was studying in 8 th standard at the relevant time. It was Sarasamma who first found Arya hanging in the three. The petitioner went to the spot hearing the hue and cry of Sarasamma. The matter was informed to the Police thereupon by the petitioner. In the autopsy, it was revealed that the deceased was subjected to both vaginal as also anal intercourse. The case which was registered earlier under Section 174 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure (the Code) was consequently amended as one under Sections 305 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (the IPC ) and also under Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (the POCSO Act). In the investigation conducted thereupon, the Police came to the conclusion that it was the petitioner who has abused the deceased sexually and she committed suicide on account of the said reason. Consequently, final report was filed in the case under Sections 305 and 376 (2) (f) of the IPC and Section 3 read with Section 4 and Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Exhibit P2 is the final report in the case. The accusation in the case is that the petitioner who was residing alone in the neighbourhood of the house of the deceased has raped and committed penetrative sexual assault on the deceased on 10.1.2015 and on several occasions thereafter at her house and thereby abetted the deceased to commit suicide.

(3.) In the meanwhile, the petitioner was arrested on 6.2.2015 and as he was not enlarged on bail, he continued in custody. It is seen that on filing the final report in the case, the petitioner preferred Criminal M.P.No.1325 of 2016 before the Special Court, invoking Section 173(8) of the Code, seeking orders for further investigation in the matter. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, the petitioner stated that he is innocent and he is prepared to to prove his innocence by subjecting himself to any scientific investigations. Various circumstances which would cast suspicion of the commission of the offences on other close relatives of the deceased were also stated by the petitioner in the affidavit. On an examination of the materials on record, the Special Court took the view that it is a case where further investigation is essential to find out the real culprit and accordingly allowed the application and directed the Police officer concerned to conduct further investigation in the matter, having regard to the allegations in the application as also, after subjecting the petitioner to scientific investigative tests such as brain mapping, polygraph etc. Exhibit.P4 is the order passed by the Special Court in this connection. Exhibit P5 is the report filed by the investigating officer in this regard. In Exhibit P5, the investigating officer has stated that various persons towards whom the petitioner has pointed his finger are innocent and has also given reasons for arriving at the said conclusion. It is also stated by the investigating officer in the report that insofar as the materials on record establish the guilt of the petitioner beyond doubt, it is unnecessary to subject the petitioner to any scientific investigative tests.