In the alleged rape case against former minister Ramesh Jarkiholi, the applicant who is the father of the victim approached the Karnataka High Court seeking to quash the statement reported by his daughter under section 164 of Cr.Pc before the judge.
In this case, the applicant is a retired soldier. He has claimed the the facts and situations of the case could make it clear that the petitioner, his own circle of relatives and his daughter are the only sufferers of Politics. The right to life incorporates the right to reputation and the exploitation of the petitioners daughters reputation directly voilates the right to the reputation of the entire family.
The fundamental right guaranteed under article 21 of the Constitution is directly voilated by the acts and ommisions of the respondents, while also facilitating the recording of statement of the daughter under sec 164 of the Cr.pc.
It is claimed that this statement voilates the legal record and can be cancelled for judicial purposes and a fair investigation of the case.
Additionally, the plea also mentions that, while recording the statement the compulsory requirements of the said provision did not meet specific standards, in fact whoso ever, is made to ensure that the statement is voluntarily made.
It is claimed that the sole reason behind vitiating the statement in question was the presence of the General secretary of the legal cell, Congress party named Suryamukund Raj. His presence was reported by the media.
Moving the tower and collecting images from CCTV clearly shows the persons involvement during the recording of 165 controversial statements.
It is true that the applicants daughter has been affected by the outside world since 15 days or more, but still she filed a a complaint. She was neither allowed to appear before the investigating officer nor she was allowed to appear before the court. Further the plea claims that an advocate being an officer of the court is legally bound to have produced the petitioner's daughter before the investigating officer as soon as possible, if really she was not under pressure.
Recently the Cheif justice of Karnataka High Court had received the email from the victim, requesting the chief justice to supervise the investigation being carried out in the FIR registered by her and direct the state government to provide protection.
In the email letter she had clearly mentioned that she was not kidnapped, her family was forced to make such a statement.
The letter said that, "This is my fight, the family is captive of Ramesh Jarkiholi"
The plea is likely to be brought to the Court in due course.
.webp)
