The Bombay High Court recently directed the Mira Bhayander-Vasai Virar (MBVV) Commissioner of Police (CP) to conduct an inquiry into allegations made by an accused booked for raping a minor, against an Investigating Officer for extorting nearly Rs. 8.5 lakh for not causing harassment to the petitioner and his family. The court asked the CP to take strict action against the concerned police officer as per law in the event he has indulged in these alleged activities. "According to us, even if there is an iota of truth in the statements made by the petitioner's lawyer, then it is a serious matter of concern for the criminal justice system in our State," the bench noted. It stayed proceedings before a special court designated under the POCSO Act based on the impugned FIR till the next date of hearing. A division bench of Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Neela K Gokhale last week passed an order on a plea by an accused person, who sought quashing an FIR registered in 2021 for the offence of raping a minor punishable under Indian Penal Code (IPC) along with provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. As per the plea argued by advocate Tushar Lavhate, after the victim — who had told her parents that she was going to a friend's place for a birthday function — did not return and could not be traced, an FIR was lodged against the unknown person in 2021. During the probe, it allegedly transpired that the victim had become friends with the petitioner and during their stay at a hotel, he allegedly sexually assaulted her. Lavhate submitted that police repeatedly visited the petitioner's family members to harass them by calling them to the police station and threatening to implicate them them in the present FIR. The petitioner disputed the victim's statement before the magistrate that she was nearly 14-15 years of age on the date of the incident. The plea claimed she was over 18 years of age at the time of the alleged incident and documents were forged to show she was a minor. The HC noted that Lavhate made "startling and serious" allegations against the IO and claimed that he, through a local lawyer, extorted nearly Rs 8.5 lakh from the petitioner and his family for not harassing them. Lavhate produced details of transactions and said some of the amount was asked to be deposited in the bank account of the wife of the lawyer in question. Lavhate alleged that the IO had made the victim "disappear" so that she could not appear before any court to give her statement. Lavhate further argued that the victim's statement did not allege any overt acts against his client and he was falsely implicated in the case. In August, this year, another bench of HC, while hearing an anticipatory bail plea by the petitioner, had directed that no coercive action be taken against him till October 4. The court, posting the matter for further hearing on October 14, directed the MBVV Police CP to file a detailed reply to the plea and also directed him to seek an explanation from the IO concerned and the local lawyer and sought a report from the police.
