MUKUL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two revisions have been filed assailing the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala who allowed the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. I propose to deal with both the petitions together as they arise out of the same order.

(2.) Manjinder Singh had got a case registered. The complainant's daughter (referred to as the victim) was 16 years old and was studying in Scholar Fields Public School, Patiala. She was staying as a paying guest in a residential house located in Sant Nagar, Patiala. On 25.12014 the victim called her mother Harinder Kaur and told her that a boy had been threatening her on phone and was demanding that she should maintain illicit relations with him, failing which he would post her nude photographs on the net. The victim also confided in her maternal uncle Gurvinder Singh. Gurvinder Singh made a call on the mobile number given by his niece. The person whose number was given was Lovish Thapar. Lovish Thapar was asked not to contact the victim. The victim was returning on her moped at 6:00 P.M. on the fateful day but she did not reach her house nor attended any calls. The family started a search and found the moped parked at the Bhakhra canal. The mobile was lying in the boot of the moped. The father suspected that fed up with the harassment at the hands of Lovish Thapar his daughter had jumped in the canal. In the initial investigation no-one could give any details. The phone recovered from the moped was unlocked. The incoming and outgoing call details were gone into. The messages were recovered. The girl was found to be in touch with Lovish for several months. The police registered a case under Section 354-A IPC and Section 11/12 of the POCSO Act. Later the victim's body was recovered from the Bhakhra canal on 10.01.2014. Her medical examination was got done. Spermatozoa was detected. The cause of death was stated to be drowning. The police added Section 376 and Section 306 IPC.

(3.) On 18.01.2014 Manjinder Singh made a supplementary statement to the Investigating Officer and named several other persons including Misha Saggar. The complainant requested the Inspector General of Police to get a SIT constituted. SIT was constituted and the mobile phones of the victim, the main accused and other persons were gone into. Two of the phones could not opened due to some technical defect. The SIT found that Mukul (petitioner) was constantly chatting with the victim from 21.12.2013 up to the date of incident. In that chat the police found that Lovish Thapar was demanding a I-Phone from the victim and on her failure he was threatening to upload her pictures on the net. The SIT in its report noted that Mukul was supporting the victim.