B SIVAPPI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition seeks a direction for investigation by Central Bureau of Investigation.

(2.) A young girl by name Manimegalai aged 17 years had been taken on the night of 09.10.2006. It transpires that she had been taken away to Goa. A complaint in Tamil had been preferred on 06.11.2006 by mother of the girl and the translation of the same in English is as follows: 'While I was in prison for prohibition offences, my husband and daughter Manimegalai were staying in the house. On 10.10.2006 morning, my daughter was found missing. After enquiry, I came to know that one Rasathi along with his associates Simon, Durai, Thanikalas and Rupan kidnapped my daughter along with two sovereigns of gold. Since I was not able to trace out my daughter, my husband informed the same to the Village Panchayat. Even though the said Rasathi had confessed himself before the Panchayat for the alleged kidnap and agreed to bring my daughter within two days, Rasathi did not turn up even after one month. Later on, I was informed by my niece Muthulakshmi that my daughter was set on fire on 01.11.2006 in Goa. Hence, I preferred a complaint on 02.11.2006 before the 4th respondent herein and the complaint was refused to accept for the reason the occurrence took place outside Tamil Nadu. When I contacted on the number given by my niece Muthulakshmi, my daughter muttered repeatedly that she had been set on fire by pouring oil onto her body and disconnected the line. Later on, the said Rasathi informed of the address of a hospital Bambooli, Bangalore-Uppili. When contacted again on the same number, my daughter Manimegalai urged me to come to that place along with higher people to rescue her, since she was in a serious condition due to the burn injury. Thereafter, I made a complaint to various officials by furnishing the phone number to conduct proper investigation in the matter to save my daughter's life.'

(3.) LEARNED Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that due investigation has been conducted in the matter and the culprits had been brought to book. The Executive Magistrate at Goa had recorded the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. from the victim girl at 7:45p.m. on 02.11.2006. As the girl has died, the same has now become admissible evidence under Section 32 of the Evidence Act. Such statement has been recorded by the learned Magistrate after following due procedure. A reading of the statement makes it very clear that the deceased girl had suffered burn injuries owing to an accident in the hut, questioned about her husband, she has stated that theirs was a love marriage and the husband was a very good man, who loved her very much and that what had happened was a case of mere accident. LEARNED Magistrate had taken due precautions and the questions had been put in Hindi, which had been interpreted in Tamil and the answer given in Tamil again was interpreted in Hindi to the Magistrate. On finding that the persons named in the complaint of the petitioner, viz. Rasathi and others had taken away the victim girl in improper manner and committed other offences, due charge sheet had been filed. There was nothing to suspect any wrong doing on the part of the fourth respondent police to call for any interference or action by this Court.