JUDGMENT Surinder Singh, J By means of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the minor petitioner (9 years) through her mother seeks a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to entrust the investigation of FIR No. 40 of 2010 under Section 376 Indian Penal Code registered in police Station Jawalamukhi to C.B.I. to conduct investigation afresh and arrest 9th respondent Nitin Kumar and conduct his DNA test. 2. Precisely, facts giving rise to the present petition are that the prosecutrix alleged rape by some un-known persons on 1.3.2010 and her allegations were recorded in terms of FIR No. 40 of 2010 registered in police station Jawalamukhi. She was taken from one place to another for medical examination for want of a lady doctor. Ultimately after her medical examination she was admitted in the hospital for the treatment of injury on her person. On 2.3.2010 9th respondent was brought by the respondent before her for identification but she could not identify him. Even on 2.4.2010 his blood samples were taken for DNA and sent for examination by F.S.L. Junga, which did not match. It is alleged that on 27.9.2010, the prosecutrix identified the 9th respondent by his photographs but according to the petitioner, he was neither interrogated nor arrested as such filed the present petition with the above prayer. 3. Notices were issued to the respondents. On 27.9.2011, the matter was gone into and the investigating Officer was present. He was heard and some astonishing facts were revealed to this Court as such this Court passed the following detailed order: “Mr. Manmohan Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dehra is present. It is submitted that he has been investigating this case since the last two months. It is reported that during his investigation, it has come out that there has been such instances of sexual assault on other minor girl children during the past and he has come across five such instances, as is seen from the case file. But, it is submitted that those cases have not been investigated since there was no complaint. But, we fail to understand as to what prevented the police from investigating such cases also. The offences certainly required to be investigated in the larger public interest. But, it is submitted that those cases have not been investigated since there was no complaint. But, we fail to understand as to what prevented the police from investigating such cases also. The offences certainly required to be investigated in the larger public interest. IN case six such instances of sexual assault of minor children have taken place during the past five years at Jawalamukhi and in case the police could not set in motion their machinery to conduct a proper and effective investigation for booking the culprits and preventing recurrence of such instances, certainly it calls for serious consideration on the duty and role of the police. No wonder in such incidents recurring if this be the attitude of the police. No person has been arrested so far, the incident took place in broad day light between 2 to 3 p.m. It has also come out from the case records that the minor child in this case was first taken to Community Health Centre, Jawalamukhi at around 8.30 p.m. (the incident occurred between 2 to 3 p.m.) on 1st March, 2010. The Medical Officer, it appears, referred the child to Dehra hospital and it is seen that at Dehra also lady doctor was not available and hence the child was seen by a lady doctor at 12.40. p.m. and thereafter the child was referred to Medical College, Tanda where she has been admitted at 5.40 a.m. The agony, anguish, pain and the trauma the little child has undergone for about 15 hours including one night, not only account of the incident, but on the references and investigations by the doctors, one cannot imagine. Apparently, the attitude on the part of the doctor at Jawalamukhi has been so callous and indifferent. Such ill fate to a child shall not happen in future. There will be a direction to the Medical Officer at Community Health Centre, Jawalamukhi on duty on 1st March, 2010 to be present before this court on 11th October, 2011. The SHO Jawalamukhi shall ensure his presence, as above. Mr. Karam Singh, Inspector, is present. He was Sub Inspector of Police, Jawalamukhi Police Station on 1st March, 2010 and it is seen that the statements have been recorded by him. The SHO Jawalamukhi shall ensure his presence, as above. Mr. Karam Singh, Inspector, is present. He was Sub Inspector of Police, Jawalamukhi Police Station on 1st March, 2010 and it is seen that the statements have been recorded by him. There will be a direction to him to file an affidavit as to what was the reason for the delay between 8.30 p.m. and 12.40 p.m. for taking this child from Jawalamukhi to Dharamshala. He shall also explain how the child was taken to the hospital, the vehicle in which they traveled and the persons accompanying her and such other details. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, who is present before us, submits that the petitioner and her family members are not rendering proper cooperation. We do not think that their cooperation is such a significant factor at the initial stage of the investigation since there are various other circumstances to be looked into. The investigation in such cases shall not be another traumatic experience to a child. However, we direct the petitioner that in case the second DNA is found necessary for corroborating the evidences already collected by the police, the petitioner shall render necessary cooperation. In view of apparently distressing sequence of events, referred to above, there will be a direction to the second respondent, Director General of Police, to personally look into the matter, supervise the investigation not only of this incident, but also the other five similar instances of sexual assault on the minor girl children at Jawalamukhi during the past 3-4 years and file his personal affidavit before this Court. The deputy Superintendent of Police, who is investigating the case, shall also file an affidavit showing the progress of investigation. There will be a direction to the Director General of Police, Himachal Pradesh, Superintendent of Police, Kangra and Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dehra to render adequate and effective protection to the petitioner and her family members. They shall also see whether the child requires any counseling and if so, the same shall be arranged. The respondents will see that the child is in a position to pursue her studies without any difficulty. There will be a direction to respondents No. 2 to 4 to take effective steps for implementation of the directions, as above.” 4. They shall also see whether the child requires any counseling and if so, the same shall be arranged. The respondents will see that the child is in a position to pursue her studies without any difficulty. There will be a direction to respondents No. 2 to 4 to take effective steps for implementation of the directions, as above.” 4. Shri Manmohan Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police Dehra with respect to the status of the investigation of this case whereby he stated that the investigation in the FIR was being conducted by Shri Karam Singh the then SHO and vide order dated 30.3.2010 it was transferred to S.I.U Dharamshala and subsequently to S.I. Virender Jaswal of police station Jawalamukhi and ultimately investigation of this case was handed over to him on 23.7.2011. According to him, apart from the complainant the suspect was seen by Surinder Kumar @ Sidhu Miss Jyoti @ Jotu D/o Des Raj vill. Darin and all of them in their statements suspected to be an unknown person. So during the investigation of this case suspected persons were brought for identification before complainant and shop keeper Surinder Kumar but neither of them identified any of them, including respondent No. 9 NItin Kumar. On the basis of the description given by the prosecutrix, NCRB Delhi also prepared the sketch of the alleged victim and these sketches were shown to the villagers of the area but nobody could furnish any information. 5. Further, during the course of investigation 200 people were investigated and enquired into and 250 people were secretly examined but no person matching with the sketch was brought on record. Subsequently, prosecutrix and her family members started suspecting respondent No. 9 Nitin Kumar so; the sample of DNA was taken for examination in the State Forensic Science Laboratory but DNA profile did not match. The complainant and her family members were not satisfied with such test and raised doubts and supplementary statement of mother of prosecutrix was also recorded on 16.7.2011 whereby she demanded second DNA test to be conducted by a Laboratory outside the State. The complainant and her family members were not satisfied with such test and raised doubts and supplementary statement of mother of prosecutrix was also recorded on 16.7.2011 whereby she demanded second DNA test to be conducted by a Laboratory outside the State. As such, an application Annexure R1 was moved as per direction passed by this Court and further a lady constable was deputed in the protection of the victim vide Annexure R2 and steps for counseling were also taken through District Welfare office Special investigation team headed by SDPO Dehra was also constituted vide Annexure R4 dated 1.10.2011. Every effort was being made to find out the suspect and arrest him. 6. Said Shri Manmohan Singh Dy. S.P. was also present before this Court on 8.10.2011. He informed this Court that DNA samples were taken and sent for Delhi Central Forensic Science Laboratory. Directions were also given to him by this Court to inform the Court about the progress of the other cases of rape/molestation which had come to the notice during the course of the present investigation. 7. Director General of Police had also filed his reply-affidavit and submitted that the Superintendent of Police Kangra was directed by him to submit the progress of the investigation through Inspector General Police (N.R). The comments were also sought as to why it took so much time to get the victim medically examined. He was also directed to provide effective protection to the victim and her family members and in case prosecutrix required any counseling, it was ordered to be arranged for her. Further a direction was also issued to ensure proper vigil to check sexual abuse on the minors. Copy of the said communication is annexure R-2/1. 8. With respect to the delayed medical examination of the prosecutrix, appropriate instructions vide letter dated 5.10.2011 Annexure R2/2 were issued to ensure that no inordinate delay is caused in such type of cases. 9. In so far as the present case is concerned, the matter was stated to have been reported on 1.3.2010 at 8.30 p.m., immediately thereafter the prosecutrix was taken to CHC Jawalamukhi for medical examination from where she was referred to Government Hospital Dehra but no lady doctor was present thus she was taken to Zonal Hospital Dharamshala where her medical examination was conducted and then admitted for treatment at RPGMC Tanda on the same day. Police protection was provided and counseling of the victim was also arranged copy thereof is annexure R-2/3. In the affidavit aforesaid it is mentioned that the replying respondent had been monitoring investigation of all the cases on weekly basis. But in the instant case, accused could not be traced despite vigorous efforts and the Additional Director General of police (CID) was requested to maintain vigil to trace the accused specially the drug addicts and other anti social elements and to keep watch on the strangers, hawkers and outsiders. He has also given the details of previous FIRs with respect to eve teasing, molestation and rape cases and the status thereof. According to him, keeping in view the gravity of these cases, a special team has been constituted to investigate the same by the Superintendent of Police, Kangra vide order dated 1.10.2011 Annexure R-2/4. 10. A fresh sketch was also drawn on the basis of statement given by the victim and the investigation is in progress to reach to a logical end. 11. The learned Advocate General had informed this Court with respect to the instructions given by the Director Health Services to the medical officers, copy whereof was ordered to be placed on record and on 29.11.2011, this Court passed the following order:- “Sh. Manmohan Singh, Investigating officer is present before us. Though, the father of the victim made a submission that there is no fruitful investigation, we find it difficult to appreciate that submission. Going through the case diary, we find that there is good progress in the investigation. We do not want to make any further observation in that regard in view of the pendency of the investigation. We are informed that the DNA sample has already been forwarded to the Forensic Laboratory of the CBI in Delhi on 8.11.2011 and acknowledged by them on 17.11.2011. We expect that the CBI will give due priority for this DNA test and forward their finding to the Investigating Officer, at the earliest. Post for further orders on 3.1.2012.” 12. On 12.1.2012 investigating officer who was present in the Court sought some time to pursue further action in the light of the report of F.S.L. and the case was adjourned for 14.3.2012. Post for further orders on 3.1.2012.” 12. On 12.1.2012 investigating officer who was present in the Court sought some time to pursue further action in the light of the report of F.S.L. and the case was adjourned for 14.3.2012. This court was satisfied with the conduct of the investigating officer aforesaid that he was taking all out earnest steps for investigation not only in this case but in other similar cases as well. 13. Status report of the case was also sent for. It was filed in the Court and on 27.8.2012, this court passed the following orders: “Shri Bharam Dass Bhatia, Deputy Superintendent of police, Dehra is present. He has filed the status report dated 25.8.2012. Counsel for the petitioner seeks time to get instruction as to the fate of the application(s) moved before the JMIC, Dehra for recording of statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and application for direction to conduct lie-detection-test on some of the persons. There will be a direction to the JMIC, Dehra, to dispose of the pending application(s) in that regard, expeditiously. Post on 27.9.2012” 14. On the strength of the aforesaid facts coming on record, no direction as sought for can be issued to investigate the case through C.B.I when there is no allegation of forging the record or shielding the accused and to order the arrest of respondent No. 9 Nitin Kumar. But however, if the police would find his complicity, clue or link with the alleged offence, they are at liberty to take all steps permissible under the law. 15. We hope and trust that the team constituted for investigating the said FIR, would take earnest steps to apprehend the accused by all possible means, but an innocent may not be harmed at any cost, in that event in would be a travesty of justice. 16. Further, we also direct that as and when if any of the police officer coming across any information of the incident of rape or molestation, he shall immediately lodge FIR even without waiting for the victim or her relative(s) to lodge report as it being a cognizable offence and of a serious nature effecting the society. 17. We further direct that a prompt examination of the victim without any loss of time and without causing any inconvenience or avoidable problem to the victim be resorted to. 18. 17. We further direct that a prompt examination of the victim without any loss of time and without causing any inconvenience or avoidable problem to the victim be resorted to. 18. The Director Health Services shall also ensure by issuing appropriate directions, if not already in place, for proper arrangement for the same by a lady doctor or by a team of doctors by associating a female doctor one of its members, if the case so requires. 19. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.