Rape victim’s statement cannot be questioned by investigating officer: Allahabad High Court.
In a major ruling, the Allahabad High Court has held that after the sufferer in a rape case has recorded her statement earlier than the Justice of the Peace and it’s totally different from her statement recorded earlier than the investigation officer (IO), the IO cannot interrogate her once more and put particular inquiries to her pertaining to the 2 totally different variations given by her within the two statements.
In such a state of affairs, the IO additionally cannot report her statements and proceed with the investigation additional, the court docket added.
In the issues in hand, the sufferer after giving her statement below Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) earlier than the IO levelling allegations of rape in opposition to the accused, had modified her model later in her statement recorded below Section 164 of the Code earlier than the Justice of the Peace.
The IO then recorded the statement of the sufferer once more below Section 161 of the Code and put particular inquiries to her close to the mentioned variations in her statements and recorded her solutions to the mentioned questions.
Giving this judgement, Justice Samit Gopal noticed, “The statement made by the victim under section 164 of the Code before the magistrate stands on a high pedestal and sanctity during the course of investigation than that of her statement recorded under section 161 of the Code by the investigating officer.”
The court docket noticed, “The act of putting specific questions pertaining to the variations in the said two statements by the investigating officer is viewed with an impression of clearly challenging the authority of a judicial act.”
“The IOs have clearly exceeded their jurisdiction by proceedings to investigate in such a manner. The same appears to be with a sole purpose to frustrate the statements recorded by a magistrate.”
The court docket directed the Uttar Pradesh DGP to look into the mentioned new development of investigation and subject appropriate tips in order that the sanctity and authority of the judicial proceedings are maintained and they need to not be pissed off by any act performed throughout investigation.
Besides, the court docket additionally directed the Registrar (Compliance) of this court docket and the state authorities counsel to speak this order to the DGP for its compliance and needed motion inside a interval of 1 month and submit a compliance report inside one week thereafter.
