JAMMU: In the much publicised mysterious disappearance of a minor domestic help Mohammed Rafiq from the residence of Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Rajouri, the Division Bench of the State High Court comprising Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur on Wednesday expressed displeasure/anguish over the ongoing investigation and termed the same ineffective.
The court directed Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Jammu to file a status report by June 12 indicating steps taken for tracing the missing boy.
When this matter of wide public importance came up for hearing before the Division Bench, Senior AAG S S Nanda apprised the Court that SHO Police Station Trikuta Nagar, Jammu Inspector Naveen Angral along with case diaries is present pursuant to yesterday’s directions of the Court.
The Division Bench minutely perused the case diaries and expressed its grave concern over missing of the minor boy and in the open court directed the SHO to read the statement of the CJM, Rajouri recorded during investigation.
In the statement, which was read out in the open court, the CJM Rajouri has stated that he had kept Mohammed Rafiq at his house, situated at Kiryani Talab, Bathindi, Jammu, on the insistence of an Inspector Excise who had told him that Mohammad Rafiq wants to study and his parents are very poor. “Mohammed Rafiq was kept at his home solely for providing him education”, the CJM is reported to have stated.
The Division Bench also directed the SHO concerned to read the statement of the PSO of the CJM Rajouri and after going through his statement the Division Bench headed by Chief Justice N. Paul Vasanthakumar remarked that there is contradiction amongst the statements of the duo as the PSO in his statement has stated that he had seen Mohammed Rafiq near Makkah Masjid Bathindi, Jammu on the date of missing.
The Division Bench also put a specific query to the Police Team as to whether it has verified and recorded the statement of the Headmaster of the School where Mohammed Rafiq was studying.
Upon this the SHO informed the Division Bench that Mohammed Rafiq had been admitted in a local school of village Raghura and according to his investigation the minor boy did not go to the said school from the last one and a half year.
On being questioned, the SHO submitted to the Division Bench that the date of birth of the minor is June, 10, 2015 and today the minor completes 16 years. At this stage Advocate Deepika Singh Rajawat petitioner-in-person/Child Rights Activist submitted before the Court that ever since the minor was engaged as domestic help he was never sent to school by CJM Rajouri and his studies were discontinued. She further submitted that although as on today the minor has completed 16 years of age but when he was engaged by CJM Rajouri the child was only 12 years old.
In heated arguments from both the sides, Advocate Deepika Singh Rajawat submitted in the open court that SDPO East Jammu Mohammed Rafiq Manhas had humiliated and abused the parents of the minor domestic help and even the CJM Rajouri had also abused his parents, as such there was no option except to file the present petition.
She vociferously argued for constituting a SIT so that the missing boy is traced as she submitted that the parents have no faith in the local police.
The Division Bench also sought certain information from the parents of the minor who were present in the Court alongwith Advocate Rajawat.
At this stage, Advocate M.A. Bhat, appearing for CJM, Rajouri, accused the petitioner Advocate of scandalizing the matter and heated arguments were advanced and Advocate Bhat justified the investigation with the local police and said that his client is also making efforts for locating the minor.
After considering the submissions of both the sides, the Division Bench observed that it is seen from the records that the child namely Mohammed Rafiq is missing from 16th April 2015 and FIR was lodged under Section 363 RPC.
“The investigation team is unable to trace the said child as per the status report and as per the investigation details furnished before this Court”, it observed.
Considering the sensitivity of matter, the Division Bench further observed that as the child was missing for about two months but the investigation has not been effectively made. “The Court is of the view that SSP Jammu be directed to file a status indicating steps taken for tracing the missing boy”, it directed.