Role Played By Investigators Appalling; Pick & Choose In Matters Of Arrest Is Deprecated: Delhi High Court On Delay In Rescuing Trafficked Infant
The Delhi High Court was considering a petition whereby the accused applicants sought regular bail in a case of child trafficking.
Justice Girish Kathpalia, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has found the role played by the investigators in a case of child trafficking to be highly appalling after noting that the trafficked infant girl had not been rescued by the police and no action had been taken against one of the co-accused persons. The High Court further held that such kind of pick and choose in matters of arrest must be deprecated.
The High Court was considering a petition whereby the accused/applicants sought regular bail in a case registered under Section 370, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 81 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
The Single Bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia held, “Of course, the policy of the State to selectively arrest some of the accused persons cannot be approved. The police should clearly state as to whether they want to arrest an accused or not. The Court cannot direct the police to do or not to do so. Such kind of pick and choose in matter of arrest must be deprecated.”
“In this regard, the role played by the investigators in this case is highly appalling. Till date, the allegedly trafficked girl child has not been recovered/rescued by police. On this aspect also, copy of this order be sent to the concerned DCP to make sure that the said girl child is rescued at the earliest. In this regard, status report shall be filed by the concerned DCP within four weeks”, it added.
Advocate Shrikant Sharma represented the Appellant while Additional Public Prosecutor Sabharwal represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
It was alleged that the accused/applicant was involved in child trafficking. According to the prosecution, the accused/applicant and co-accused Gayatri impersonated as husband and wife, and they took an infant girl in adoption. Thereafter, they sold the said infant girl to another co-accused, Deepika, who sold the child further.
Reasoning
Taking note of the fact that the police was taking no action against one of the co-accused, Dr Kulvinder Kaur, the Bench stated that the policy of the State to selectively arrest some of the accused persons cannot be approved.
The Bench thus asked the concerned DCP to look into the matter. On the assurance of the State that Kaur would be arrested, the Bench mentioned, “It seems that now the State realizes the gravity of the alleged offence.”
On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench opined that every time custody of an infant is taken away from her biological mother, followed by the adoptive parent, followed further by other persons as in the present case, the infant suffers a tremendous dent in her psyche, which gets manifested in her personality at some future stage.
Considering the fact that the accused/applicant did not have custody of the infant, who was adopted by him, which gave a prima facie impression, as alleged by the prosecution, that the girl infant was sold away, the Bench ordered the girl child to be rescued at the earliest.
The accused/applicant sought parity with co-accused Deepika, but the Bench noted that Deepika was granted bail for the reasons completely distinct from the present case and she was also not visible in the photographs while accepting the infant girl.
Thus, dismissing the bail application, the Bench directed, “Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for being conveyed to the accused/applicant immediately.”
Cause Title: Rajkumar v. State (NCT of Delhi) (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:7282)