New Delhi [India], September 1 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has strongly criticised the police for selectively arresting accused persons in an alleged child trafficking case, observing that such a "pick and choose" approach cannot be approved.

The High Court also termed the role of investigators in the case as "highly appalling" after noting that the allegedly trafficked girl child had not been recovered or rescued till date.

Justice Girish Kathpalia made the observations while dismissing the regular bail application of an accused in an FIR registered at Nangloi Police Station under Sections 370/34 of the IPC and Section 81 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

The prosecution case, as recorded by the High Court, is that the accused Rajkumar and co-accused Gayatri allegedly impersonated themselves as husband and wife and took an infant girl in adoption. The infant was thereafter allegedly sold to co-accused Deepika, who in turn allegedly sold the child further.

The HC took particular exception to the fact that another accused, Dr Kulvinder Kaur, had not been arrested. When the court questioned the investigating officer about her status, it found that the police were "taking practically no action" against her.

"Of course, the policy of the State to selectively arrest some of the accused persons cannot be approved," the Court observed, adding that the police should clearly state whether they intended to arrest an accused or not.

The High Court said that "such kind of pick and choose in matter of arrest must be deprecated" and directed that a copy of the order be sent to the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police to look into the matter.

Following the HC's observations, the State told the Court that it would ensure the arrest of Kulvinder Kaur. The Court remarked that it appeared that the State had now realised the gravity of the alleged offence.

However, the High Court made it clear that the police's failure to arrest one of the accused could not become a reason to overlook the seriousness of the allegations against Rajkumar.

"I am of the considered view that merely because for some unknown reason, the police opted not to arrest one of the accused persons, the Court cannot shut its eyes to the gravity of the alleged offence," Justice Kathpalia said.

The Court also highlighted the psychological impact of repeatedly separating an infant from her biological mother and then from subsequent caregivers.

It observed that every time custody of an infant is taken away from her biological mother, followed by the adoptive parent and then further persons, as allegedly happened in the present case, the child suffers a "tremendous dent in her psyche", which may manifest in her personality at a later stage.

The Court further noted that, according to the prosecution, the girl was the sixth daughter in her biological family. It also took note of the prosecution's submission that Rajkumar was visible in photographs while accepting custody of the infant in the presence of her biological parents.

Since Rajkumar admittedly no longer had custody of the girl, the Court formed a prima facie view that, as alleged by the prosecution, the infant had been sold.

The Court said the investigators' conduct was particularly concerning because the allegedly trafficked child had still not been recovered or rescued.

"Till date, the allegedly trafficked girl child has not been recovered/rescued by police," the Court noted.

It directed that the order be sent to the concerned DCP to ensure that the girl child is rescued at the earliest. The DCP was also directed to file a status report within four weeks.

Rajkumar's counsel had sought bail on the ground that he had remained in custody for around two-and-a-half years and that all public witnesses had been examined during the trial. It was also argued that he had been falsely implicated because he was the paternal uncle of co-accused Deepika, who had been granted bail.

The Court, however, rejected the plea for parity with Deepika, noting that she had been granted bail for entirely different reasons and was admittedly not visible in the photographs while accepting the infant girl.
Considering the overall circumstances, the High Court concluded that it was not a fit case for grant of bail and dismissed Rajkumar's application.

(ANI)

This report was published from a syndicated wire feed. Apart from the headline, the EdexLive Desk has not edited the copy.