The Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice JS Khehar and Justices DY Chandrachud and SK Kaul on May 4 sent back the case filed by a mother alleging sexual harassment of her daughter in custody by jail superintendent Shamsher Singh Dhayya to the concerned magistrate.
The case has been closed and Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the state, said it was closed because she refused to go to the magistrate and said she would give statement only before the Supreme Court.
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for the petitioner, said: “Here is a man against whom multiple complaints have been made, not by me. When I have made a complaint, the state lodged the FIR, don’t they need to go on with the investigation? Why have they closed it? He has his options and opportunities. If there are laws they need to be activated. Let the investigation come at the appropriate stage, let it be proven that she is a liar.”
The Chief Justice said: “It’s your case. They have lodged an FIR and it is determined that it is closed. You should get an opportunity. We are invoking Section 14. We have to hear the other side too.”
Justice Chandrachud said: “If we look at the facts from the other side it shows that his name was not in the police register. It is also clearly shown in CCTV that he entered his home at 8 pm and left at 10 am in the morning.
“Your client has been harassed at 11:30 pm as claimed by you, but the accused SP was not there at that time according to the facts presented by them. We can’t ignore that.”
The order was as follows: “Pursuant to the writ petition filed by the petitioner, the stance adopted by the government could possibly reveal that the entire allegations levelled against him were false. We were informed by the counsel for petitioner that a closure report has been submitted by the police consequent to the FIR registered by the police.
“We therefore hereby direct that when the matter with respect to the closure report is placed before the magistrate, the magistrate should issue notice to the petitioner and after taking the statement of complainant and then decide according to her statement.”
—India Legal Bureau