As per the reply submitted by the IO, the report has been forwarded by the Public Prosecutor and then further sent to the office of the Director, Prosecution, and after his final approval, it is being submitted to the court. (File Photo)A Special Fast Track Court in Chandigarh has pulled up a Chandigarh Police Investigating Officer (IO) in a Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) case for filing an “incomplete investigation report”, stating “the IO in order to wriggle out of his onerous duty has merely recorded the statement of the victim, got her medical examination conducted… and submitted the report by mentioning that accused could not be traced”.Additional District and Sessions Judge Dr Yashika rejected the IO’s report in the case and directed the IO to file a complete report under Section 193 of the BNSS after completing all codal formalities.Initially, a missing FIR was registered based on the father’s complaint in June that his 15-year-old daughter had been missing. The father later told the police that his daughter returned home in less than a week, following which her medical examination was conducted, her statement was recorded, and she was counselled. On June 15, section 6 of the POCSO Act was added to the FIR. Further, the police on June 25 conducted a raid at the house of the accused, but he could not be apprehended.Meanwhile, as the IO came up with the investigation report before the court, Dr Yashika noted: “The police submitted a report purported to be under Section 193 of the BNSS, but strangely enough without joining the accused in the investigation or making any endeavour to trace the accused by issuing bailable of non-bailable warrants or proclamation proceedings from the competent court of law.”As per the reply submitted by the IO, the report has been forwarded by the Public Prosecutor and then further sent to the office of the Director, Prosecution, and after his final approval, it is being submitted to the court.On this, the court said, “The IO as well as higher authorities clearly seemed to have erred in reading and understanding the true spirit of Section 193 of the BNSS, which emphasises early completion of investigation in heinous offences, as the present one. It was never the spirit of the section that, without making any investigation into the offence, an incomplete report should be furnished before the court. On the basis of which the court can practically take no action.”“The IO in order to wriggle out of his onerous duty, has merely recorded the statement of the victim, got her medical examination conducted, recorded statement of witness and statement of the victim, and submitted the report by mentioning that the accused could not be traced,” the court said.Story continues below this adThe court said, “This in no manner can be termed as a report under Section 193 of the BNSS, which sans any investigation vis-a-vis the named accused. The purported report under Section 193 of the BNSS is rejected being incomplete. The IO is directed to file a complete report under Section 193 of the BNSS after completing all codal formalities.”Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram© The Indian Express Pvt LtdTags:POCSO cases