Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 231 (MAD)

Nirmala Rani v. The State of Tamilnadu

2003-02-18

V.KANAGARAJ

body2003
Judgment :- This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to call for the records in PRC.No.2 of 2003 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichirapalli and to quash the same. 2. The petitioner would submit that she is a practising advocate and a social activist engaged in championing the causes of oppressed classes in general and the women-folk in particular; that she is also a member of the District Juvenile Justice Board and the District Advisory Committee; that she is the District Secretary (in-charge) of the All India Democratic Women's Association which is fighting for the cause of women. 3. The petitioner would further submit that on 2.4.2002, one Mythili Sivaraman of All India Democratic Women's Association, Chennai, received an anonymous letter to the effect that one Mohana of Swaminathapuram, Thiruverambur, Trichy District was indulging the author of the letter and some other girls in prostitution against their wish and requested the Association to save them further stating that the said Mohana is silencing the local police by paying bribe and the police exploited them; that the above letter was forwarded to the Trichy Unit of the Association and the enquiry made by the said Unit revealed the inter-state trafficking of women and therefore a representation was given to the District Collector, which in turn was forwarded to the Police for investigation; that representations were also given to the National Human Rights Commission and to the Additional Director General of Police, CBCID on 25.10.2002; that though the representation was given on 18.10.2002, only after efforts taken by the Association, a case was registered against the said Mohana on 29.10.2002 under Section 4(2)(b) of the Indian Trafficking (Prevention) Act. 4. The petitioner would further submit that the above said events were published in all the newspapers both in English and vernacular dailies and in such circumstances, news item appeared in vernacular dailies that All India Democratic Women's Association is naming the entire eunuch community as pimps taking advantage of the fact that Mohana is a eunuch and all these reports were duly denied by the Association; that in this background, a case was registered against the petitioner on the complaint given by the above Mohana on 5.11.2002 for the alleged offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The petitioner would submit that in the said complaint it is alleged as though the petitioner gave press statements against the complainant and when the same was questioned by the complainant, the petitioner is alleged to have threatened the complainant with disparaging remarks on her caste, which is the subject giving the cause of action the case to be registered against the petitioner. The remarks alleged to have been made by the petitioner in Tamil are as follows: 5. The remarks alleged to have been made by the petitioner in Tamil are as follows: 5. Based on the above remarks alleged to have been made by the petitioner, the defacto-complainant is said to have sent written representations to various authorities including the PCR Unit, Trichy, which is alleged to have registered a case in its Crime No.1/2002 under Section 354 IPC and Section 3(1)(xi) of the S.C. and S.T. (P.A.) Act, 1989 dated 5.11.2002 and the said F.I.R. having been transferred to the respondent, himself having investigated into the said case, has filed the charge-sheet in his charge-sheet No.3/2003 dated 1.1.2003 and the same has been taken on file by the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichirapalli in P.R.C.No.2 of 2003 and it is only praying to quash the said P.R.C., the petitioner has come forward to file the above criminal original petition on certain grounds such as, (i)that though the prosecution claims that the offence was committed within the public view, no independent witness particularly the neighbours of the petitioner were examined by the respondent during the investigation; (ii) that the offences under Sections 354 and 3(1)(xi) of the S.C. & S.T. (P.A.) Act, 1989 by their very nature can be committed only by a man and therefore, the petitioner cannot be charged for the above said offences; (iii)that Section 7 of the Protection of the Civil Rights act, 1955 is also not attracted to the materials collected by the Investigating Agency and the said Section would be attracted only if the act committed by the accused out of `untouchability'; (iv) that Section 75 of the City Police Act is also not attracted since the occurrence admittedly took place within the house of the petitioner and not in the public place; (v) that the complaint preferred by the All India Democratic Association to the Collector on 18.10.2002 was forwarded to the police and a case was registered only on 29.10.2002, however, till date, the accused in that case are not arrested and the complainant in this case, who is named accused in the petitioner's complaint gave a statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which was sponsored by the Investigating Officer and the Magistrate recorded the statement on 26.11.2002 and the complainant in that statement made no whisper about the present occurrence and this will show that this case is foisted only with a view to harass the petitioner and to stop her from effectively persuading her efforts against the social evils viz. prostitution; (vi) that the Association gave a representation to the Hon'ble Chair Person of the National Human Rights Commission on 2.12.2002 thereby mentioning violation of human rights and the fabrication of the present case was also brought to the notice of the National Human Rights Commission in that representation; that a similar representation was also given to the Director General of Police on 6.12.2002 and one Mr.Rajarathinam, Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBCID was deputed to verify the correctness of the above said representation, who gave a report that the complaint against the petitioner is false, but in spite of the above report, Final Report was filed against the petitioner only to settle the scores against her by the police officers against whom the petitioner brought actions because of their misdeeds; and (vii) that the investigating agency failed to collect any documentary evidences issued by competent authorities or statements from the revenue authorities to show that the victim belongs to scheduled caste and in the absence of such material, the charge under S.C.&S.T.(P.A.) Act is not legally sustainable. 6. During arguments the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the petitioner besides herself being a practicing lawyer, her husband and father-in-law are also practicing at Trichy in all the District Courts at Trichy. The learned senior would further apprise this Court of the petitioner's parentage being the daughter of a reputed family in the State and the country at large, her father having served as the Member of Parliament and that of the Tamil Nadu Assembly many a time in the past and her mother as well in the same manner and all the other members of her family are highly educated and have made their mark in different fields and professions. Having annexed such a solid background, following their tradition and of her parentage who served the country and its people, in a selfless manner without annexing anything materially but only the reputation by dint of pure and selfless service and sacrifices being members of the Communist Party of India throughout, the petitioner following their foot-steps threw herself for the good causes of the oppressed classes in general and the women-folk in particular being the member of the District Juvenile Justice Board which is a statutory body, District Advisory Committee to review the actions of police regarding crimes committed against women, the District Secretary of All India Democratic Women's Association, Trichy which is a National Organisation with a strong membership of 60 lakhs and with the tradition of fighting against social injustice, untouchability and all evils in the society and as the secretary of the Legal Aid Centre, Trichy providing free legal aid to women in distress. 7. While such being the commitment of the petitioner, on 2.4.2002 an anonymous letter was received by a member of All India Democratic Women's Association, Chennai, stating that one Mohana of Thiruverumbur, Trichy District is indulging the author of the letter and other girls in prostitution against their wishes, and silencing the local police by payment of mamool and hence craving help from the Association and the said letter having been forwarded to the Trichy Unit, it started probing into the activities of the said Mohana which revealed that she was indulging in inter-State trafficking of women of which the said unit made complaints to the District Collector and the Human Rights Commission and to the Additional Director General of Police CBCID on 25.10.2002 resulting in a case being registered against the said Mohana under Section 4(2)(b) of the Indian Trafficking(Prevention) Act on 29.10.2002 and the events had wide publicity in almost all the newspapers both English and vernacular. 8. 8. The learned senior counsel would then submit that on the 7th day of the registering of the said case that was on 5.11.2002 on a complaint alleged to have been sent by the said Mohana a case under Section 3(1(x) of SC and ST (PA)Act 1989, has been registered on allegations such as that the complainant belonged to the Hindu Chakkiliyar Community and on seeing the press statements of the petitioner, against her as though the said Mohana went to the petitioner's house to enquire about the same, when the petitioner is alleged to have uttered disparaging remarks in a degrading manner making mention of her community, and threatening her with dire consequences had she resorted to lodge any complaint.(The said remarks made in Tamil has been extracted in paragraph 4 supra). 9. The learned senior counsel would then point out that based on the said allegations the P.C.R. unit, Trichy registered a case in its Crime No.1/2002 u/s 3(1)(x) of the SC and ST (PA) Act and under pretext of an investigation held on completion of which the respondent has also filed the final report against the petitioner on 20.1.2003 for alleged offences punishable under Sections 354, 506(I) I.P.C., Section 75 of the City Police Act, Section 7 of the PCR Act 1955 and Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of SC and ST (PA) Act 1989. The learned senior counsel exhorting that no other atrocity could be committed more than what has been resorted to by the respondent against the petitioner in registering the false case, would also bring out instances in proof of a flat false case coming to be registered against the petitioner by the respondent himself using the lawful powers conferred on him by law acting in connivance with criminals like the said Mohana and the local police who are in nexus with her illegal activities for illegal monetary gains and would pray to not only quash the case falsely registered and charge sheeted against the petitioner, but also sternly deal with the and the City Police, Trichy with which nothing seems to go well with. 10. The learned senior counsel would further point out that nothing relevant was investigated into nor brought out so as to file a charge-sheet in the false case registered by the respondent in connivance with the defacto-complainant Mohana. 10. The learned senior counsel would further point out that nothing relevant was investigated into nor brought out so as to file a charge-sheet in the false case registered by the respondent in connivance with the defacto-complainant Mohana. The learned senior counsel would further point out that apart from the defacto-complainant, witnesses No.2 and 3 named in the charge-sheet are none but her husband and adopted son and the other witnesses No.4 and 5 speak nothing relevant connected to the case of the prosecution, witnesses No.6 and 7 are the formal mahazar witnesses for the preparation of the observation mahazar and sketch and the others are police officials connected to the registering of the case and investigation. 11. The learned senior counsel would further point out the fact that the respondent police have put up a false case against the petitioner under the penal provisions of the IPC, PCR Act and the SC & ST (PA) Act deliberately getting the complaint from the said Mohana with the help of the members of the family of the defacto-complainant and hence very serious doubts could be raised regarding the genuineness of the complaint registered by the respondent and the consequent investigation held, which is motivated against the petitioner. The learned senior counsel would further point out that this suspicion against the respondent having registered the complaint and filing a final report with mala fide intention against the petitioner would get consolidated in the defacto-complainant viz. Mohana having not uttered a word of the imputation alleged to have been caused to her by the petitioner which forms the crux of the complaint and the final report against the petitioner since no such occurrence ever took place and the same is imaginary and invented for the purpose of registering the false complaint against the petitioner by those who do not nurture the act of exposing the said Mohana and thereafter to file the charge-sheet knowing it to be false and fabricated. The learned senior counsel would end up his arguments not only praying to quash the FIR and the charge-sheet but also to initiate serious disciplinary proceedings by the department against the respondent. 12. The learned senior counsel would end up his arguments not only praying to quash the FIR and the charge-sheet but also to initiate serious disciplinary proceedings by the department against the respondent. 12. On the part of the learned Government Advocate representing the respondent he would submit that whenever complaints of such nature have been given, it is the duty and responsibility of the respondent to register the case and investigate into and on a thorough investigation since the respondent came to the conclusion to charge-sheet the case and has done accordingly and there is no personal motive or ill-will for the respondent to register a false case against the petitioner and file the final report and would pray for dismissing the above criminal original petition. 13. In consideration of the facts pleaded, having regard to the materials placed on record and upon hearing the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate on the criminal side, what could be assessed from the whole of the case put-up by the petitioner praying for a quash of the PRC.No.2/2003 pending on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy, triable by the Court of Sessions is that a case has been registered against the petitioner under the penal provisions of not only the IPC (Sections 354 and 506(I)) but also under Section 75 of the City Police Act, Section 7 of the PCR Act, 1955 and Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the SC&ST (PA) Act based on a complaint lodged by one Mohana, a eunuch and a resident of Trichy against whom, on 29.10.2002 on the complaint of the petitioner, a case under Section 4(2)(b) of the Indian Trafficking (Prevention) Act was registered by Thiruverambur poolice, Trichy. 14. Tracing the said case registered against the said Mohana on the complaint of the petitioner in the public interest, what comes to be known is that on an ananymous letter received by a member of the All India Democratic Women's Association, Chennai viz. Mythili Sivaraman on trafficking of women stating that the accused in the said case viz. 14. Tracing the said case registered against the said Mohana on the complaint of the petitioner in the public interest, what comes to be known is that on an ananymous letter received by a member of the All India Democratic Women's Association, Chennai viz. Mythili Sivaraman on trafficking of women stating that the accused in the said case viz. Mohana was indulging the author of the letter and some other girls in prostitution against their wishes, silencing the local police by payment of mamool to them and craving help from the said Association and the said letter having been forwarded to the Trichy Unit, of which the petitioner is the Secretary, she started probing into the activities of the said Mohana and on coming to know of the truth attached to the said letter to the effect that the said Mohana was indulging in running the prostitution and is active in the inter-state trafficking of women, the petitioner has been instrumental in lodging the complaints against the said Mohana and alerting the District Collector, the Human Rights Commission and the Additional Director General of Police, CBCID on 25.10.2002 against such atrocities committed by the said Mohana resulting in a case being registered against the said Mohana under Section 4(2)(b) of the Indian Trafficking (Prevention) Act in Tiruverambur Police Station Crime No.901/2002, dated 29.10.2002 and the successive events attracting wide publicity in almost all the newspapers, both English and vernacular. 15. 15. The media highlighted the petitioner for championing the causes of women and busting the gang of inter-State trafficking of women, which not only exposed the criminal nexus of the urban and rural Trichy police, without whose nodding signal, no such illicit trafficking of women could take place since it is a social evil, difficult to be concealed from the public eye and naturally the act of the petitioner has gained the wrath of the police in general and those who are concerned to deal with such illegal and anti-social activities of running the prostitution and indulging in inter-state trafficking of women, particularly the respondent as a result of which it could be seen that a very mild case has been registered against the main offender, the said Mohana, by the Tiruverambur police within whose jurisdiction the illicit trafficking has taken place, without any deep investigation being done and busting the entire gang, which fall into the ring of the conduct of prostitution and inter-State trafficking of women thus helping the accused escape with minor punishment, but also the contempt, ill-will and the hatred of the Trichy Police seem to have turned against the petitioner as a result of which, exactly on the 7th day of registering the said case against the said Mohana causing such imputations, as extracted in para No.3 supra, and making out a complaint as though the author of which was the said Mohana and while uttering the disparaging remarks said to have been made by the petitioner at her own residence, as though the said Mohana's husband and adopted son were together, thus cooking a case against the petitioner and registering the same in Cr.No.1/2002 and as though some sort of investigation has been done, recording some irrelevant materials of the 4th and 5th witnesses, which have absolutely no relevance to the context of the case and showing the 6th and 7th witnesses as the mahazar witnesses for the preparation of the observation mahazar and the sketch of the place of occurrence, the other witnesses viz. 8,9 and 10 being the police officials, the respondent has filed the charge-sheet against the petitioner for the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 506(I)) IPC, Section 75 of the City Police Act, Section 7 of the PCR Act, 1955 and Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the SC&ST (PA) Act. 16. 8,9 and 10 being the police officials, the respondent has filed the charge-sheet against the petitioner for the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 506(I)) IPC, Section 75 of the City Police Act, Section 7 of the PCR Act, 1955 and Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the SC&ST (PA) Act. 16. If any case has to be registered against anyone with mala fide intentions and with hatred, ill-will and contempt, it could easily be done in the manner in which the above case is registered by the respondent and alleged to have been investigated and the final report filed without an iota of truth or circumstance being brought forth from independent sources and in such event, no one is safe to escape from the clutches of such police officers and their ill-motivated designs of registering the false case much less those who are in public service like the petitioner. 17. The act of the respondent in having registered the above case against the petitioner in a mala fide manner gains strength and gets consolidated by the statement made by the complainant Mohana before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 26.11.2002 which has been sponsored by the very Investigating Officer and the respondent herein wherein the complainant made no whisper about any such remarks made on the part of the petitioner, degrading the dignity of the caste or community of the defacto-complainant Mohana and no stronger or further proof need be required to establish that registering the case and filing the charge-sheet falsely against the petitioner is the handiwork of the Trichy City Police in general and the respondent in particular with the help of the said Mohana and in criminal nexus with each other and wreaking vengeance against the petitioner for she busted the whole ring of illicit trafficking of women at Trichy and exposed the inefficiency and inaction of such menace to the general public. 18. 18. The petitioner having waited all these days from the date of registering of the case with fervent hopes that since it is a false case registered, action would be dropped on ground that the complaint is false and only after coming to know that the final report itself has been falsely and intentionally laid by the respondent in an orchestrated manner resulting in the concerned Magistrate taking up the same as the P.R.C.No.2/2003 and at this stage, the petitioner, to safeguard her interest, has come forward to file the above criminal original petition seeking to quash the case registered and charge-sheeted against her falsely. 19. Being a member of a reputed family in the District and the State at large and herself having a solid and unblemished 14 years' standing in the Trichy Bar, having the parentage which is wedded to the national cause and her husband and father-in-law being leading practitioners in law at Trichy Bar annexing a good reputation and herself getting associated with many social organisations to do all the good to the Society, the petitioner, could not be reasonably thought of indulging in such offences that too without the least provocation being offered on the part of the defacto-complainant Mohana and the imputations alleged to have been hurled against the said Mohana had no reason to come out at that juncture pointed out in the complaint since the very meeting of the complainant with her is denied on her part during the arguments and all these factors jointly would go to prove only that the respondent has not been either fair or reasonable or dutiful or responsible in registering the case against the petitioner, which is not only unreasonable but atrocious and unbecoming on the part of a Police Officer of the stature of the respondent, which has been done knowingly and intentionally to be false. The very fact that in her statement recorded by the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the defacto-complainant did not at all whisper anything regarding her meeting with the petitioner nor the remarks alleged to have been made by the petitioner are sufficient to prove the final report falsely filed against the petitioner by the respondent by mere misuse of the authority conferred on him by law which is to be condemned to the core. 20. 20. This Court is further of the view that the respondent could not have achieved in the foisting of the above criminal case on his own without the nodding signal of his superior officers upto the Commissioner of Police, who are in-charge of and responsible for registering of such case under the S.C. & S.T. (PA) Act, 1985 which could be registered only in accordance with the provisions of Rules 5 to 7 of the SC & ST (PA) Rules, 1995 and these Officers concerned with monitoring such cases registered have also thoroughly failed in their duties and responsibilities and therefore it has become incumbent on the part of this Court to take it to the notice of the Government against those Officers, who have failed to check such cases being foisted against innocent persons such as the petitioner, by sheer misuse of the authority conferred by law and hence this Court is not only of the view to pass its condemnations against the respondent but needs to be written to the Government against the pathetic plight of such respectable and innocent members of the Society rendering noble service to the Society at the hands of unreasonable and dishonest police Officers, such as the respondent, who, instead of resorting to curb the illegalities in the Society are harping on those who do humane service to the Society at their own costs. 21. For all the discussions held above, the above criminal original petition deserves to be allowed. 21. For all the discussions held above, the above criminal original petition deserves to be allowed. However, for the immeasurable mental agony and affliction that the petitioner would have undergone all these days, for no fault on her part but only having gone to the rescue of innocent girls from being inducted into prostitution coupled with the physical hardship that the petitioner would have been put into and the respondent being the sole reason for causing such hardships, inconveniences and stigma in the society to the petitioner by registering the false case only with the mala fide intention to wreak vengeance against the petitioner for having exposed people like the defacto-complainant and indirectly helping the anti-social elements and therefore, it is only appropriate to allow the above criminal original petition with heavy damages of Rs.25,000/= (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) that is to be paid to the petitioner by the respondent within seven days from the date that this order copy is made ready besides bringing it to the notice of the Government to probe into all about the Trichy City Police in general and the respondent in particular and their activities in having criminal nexus and encouraging the anti-social elements, which seems to be rampant in the recent times in and around the Trichy City on account of such nexus of police with criminals since such actions initiated should only serve as a lesson to the erring police officers who mis-use their lawful authority and help and encourage the criminals to escape from the clutches of law and hence the following order: In result, (i)the above criminal original petition is allowed. (ii)the proceeding in PRC No.2 of 2003 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichirapalli is hereby quashed. (iii)The respondent/Assistant Commissioner of Police, Srirangam Range, Srirangam, Trichy District is directed to pay to the petitioner a sum of Rs.25,000/= (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) as damages within seven days from the date that the copy of this order is made ready. It is made clear that the respondent shall bear the said amount from out of his personal funds and not that of the State. It is made clear that the respondent shall bear the said amount from out of his personal funds and not that of the State. (iv) The Government of Tamil Nadu is directed to initiate disciplinary proceeding against the respondent and his superior officials concerned with the City Commissionarate, Trichy for their approval of such foisting of the cases or non-performance or inaction and to set right the force introducing such remedial measures for avoiding such recurrence in future thus safeguarding the genuine interests of the innocent citizens like the petitioner. Consequently, Crl.M.P.Nos.1061 and 1062 of 2003 are closed.