Rape victim made to go from one police station to another to register complaint; Madras High Court directs probe

The Madras High Court recently directed the Madurai Police to conduct a thorough investigation into why a rape victim was made to run from one police station to another for around 24 days before her complaint was finally registered. [Rajamani v. The Inspector General of Police (South Zone) and others]. .In an order passed on November 15, Justices MS Ramesh and Anand Venkatesh of the Madurai Bench directed the concerned Deputy Superintendent of Police to "investigate the case from all angles" and file a final report within three months..The Court was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by the victim's sister. The petitioner had said that her sister had been kept in a state-run care home for women following her complaint, and that the authorities were not even letting the victim's family members meet her.On the previous hearing, Justice Venkatesh had directed the police to produce the victim in court and had permitted her to go home with her sister.However, when he learnt of the ordeal she had to face to register her complaint, he expanded the scope of the habeas corpus petition and directed the concerned police to file a report detailing what happened when the victim first approached the police and how the complainant finally came to be registered..The petitioner's counsel informed the Court that immediately after the incident of rape on October 5 this year, the victim approached the Chatrapatti Police Station, but an officer told her to wait for his senior to come to the station. After waiting for a while, the victim left. The next day, she again visited the same police station but, this time, she was made to go to a second police station in Natham. From Natham, she was made to go to Sanarpatti. She finally approached the Deputy Inspector General of Police, who then directed the Circle Officer to register her complaint. By this time, 24 days had passed since the incident. .The police told the Court that an inquiry had already been initiated into the lapses on the part of its personnel..Advocate Karunanidhi appeared for the petitioner. Additional Public Prosecutor A Thiruvadikumar appeared for the respondents..[Read order]