Court seeks reply from SHO for not providing copy of FIR to accused in rape case

New Delhi, Aug 29 (PTI) A Delhi court has denounced the conduct of a Delhi Police official for not providing the copy of an FIR in a rape case to the accused persons and sought a reply from the station house officer (SHO).

Additional sessions judge Bhupinder Singh also allowed the anticipatory bail plea of two accused persons booked for rape, voluntarily causing hurt and common intention.

"In the event of arrest of the accused persons, they be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs 1 lakh with one surety of like amount each to the satisfaction of the IO/SHO concerned," the court said.

Taking on record the submissions of the accused's counsel that the FIR copy wasn't shared despite repeated requests but supplied during the course of the arguments, the court said the investigating officer (IO) was unable to convince it about the reasons behind it and instead took a "constistent stand" of following directions of senior officials.

Denouncing the conduct, the judge said, "By not getting aware of the actual contents of the FIR, an accused may not be able to avail legal remedies as may be available to him but has to rely only on guess work regarding the allegations, which in the court’s opinion seriously prejudice him." Calling for a reply from the SHO with reasons, the court said, "The standing orders, if any, on this aspect be also called along with the reply." On the point of pre-arrest bail, the court referred to the IO's reply of not requiring the custodial interrogation of the accused persons.

"Though, the IO during arguments has stated that the same may be required for the purpose of recovery of the mobile phones, wherein, as per the complainant, her nude videos were recorded but has failed to answer as to what efforts have been done till date. i.e., 10 days since the date of incident to recover the same," the court said.

The court said the IO failed to show any notice indicating the accused persons were required to be present before her for investigation.

"The court finds no merits in the submissions made by the IO that accused persons are absconding since they were never found at their home, in the absence of any written notice in this context. The accused persons or applicants are not expected to be available 24X7 at their houses, leaving their regular work, for the IO to come there unannounced," it added.

The court said the apprehension that the accused persons could threaten the complainant could be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions for the relief.

The accused, on the other hand, were saddled with several conditions, including not tampering with the evidence; not influencing the complainant and appearing before the IO whenever required. PTI MNR MNR AMK AMK