MATHUR, J. - (1.) BY way of instant habeas corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Ramswaroop seeks production of his sister namely Sunita @ Santosh. It appears that the detenue Sunita @ Santosh is a victim of rape. She lodged a First Information Report at Police Station, Hanumangarh alleging therein that while she was serving as Office Assistant in the Department of DPEP, Hanumangarh, she was being sexually exploited by the Head of the Office namely Onkar Singh R. A. S. and his associates namely Dhanne Singh, Bachhu Singh, Gurudev Singh, Shiv Narain and Milkha Singh. The police registered a case being F. I. R. No. 239/2006 at Police Station, Hanumangarh for offence under Section 376 (2) (b) IPC. Her statement under Section 164 Cr. P. C. was recorded on 28. 4. 2006 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hanumangarh. After usual investigation a charge-sheet has been filed against the said accused persons for offence under Section 376 (2) (b) IPC.
(2.) AN another F. I. R. came to be filed on 15. 8. 2006 by the petitioner herein Ramswaroop stating inter alia that on 13. 8. 2006 Dharamvir, mother of Praveen and Babli w/o Dharamvir visited their house and pressurized them to enter into a compromise. When they refused to oblige them a threatening was given of ill consequences. On 15. 8. 2006 while Sunita @ Santosh was on way to her maternal uncle's house, she was being stopped. She was being kidnapped by three persons in a Car. According to the informant the kidnappers were none else but two of the sons of accused in rape case referred to above i. e. Bunti S/o Bachhu Singh and another son of Onkar Singh. The third accused has been named as Praveen. On this information police registered a FIR Case No. 294/2006 for offence under Section 364, 195 IPC at Police Station, Pilibanga. The petitioner has produced a newspaper reporting of Rajasthan Patrika dated 26. 8. 2006 and a similar news appearing in Danik Bhaskar. It was reported that the detenue Sunita @ Santosh on her own along with Advocate Shri D. P. Pujari appeared before the Investigating Officer and filed an affidavit stating that she left the house on her own as his brother, mother and maternal uncle wanted to give her in Nata marriage. It is contended by the petitioner that Sunita @ Santosh is under unlawful detention of the accused persons in FIR Case No. 239/2006. A false and fabricated affidavit has been arranged by the family members and friends of Onkar Singh and other accused persons. The petitioner Ramswaroop also filed an additional affidavit stating inter alia that he has also been served upon a notice by Shri D. P. Pujari Advocate. He has been threatened by Mr. Pujari of taking action in event he approaches to any government or other Institution for the benefit of Sunita @ Santosh. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the detenue Sunita @ Santosh was produced before us by the police on 20. 9. 2006. It was disclosed by her that she was staying at the house of Shri D. P. Pujari Advocate at Jaipur. She further stated that she was lodged in the house of one Pyare Lal in the locality known as Pratap Nagar, Sector No. 18, Jaipur. She further stated that his wife Smt. Prem Lata was looking after her. She was being assured a job by the accused persons in the ICICI Bank as agent. She expressed her desire not to return to the house of her parents as she was likely to get job as assured. We have recorded our impression in the order dated 20. 9. 2006. It will be convenient to extract the part of the order as follows:- " We have gathered an impression while talking the detenue Sunita @ Santosh that she is under tremendous mental pressure. The possibility of tamperling of the main witness in the rape case referred to above cannot be ruled out. It is unfortunate that the police has not taken care to follow the directions given by this Court in Suo Moto's case popularly known as German Lady rape case. Some of the directions given in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2856/2005 dated 1st June, 2005 are extracted as follows:- " (a) As soon as case of sexual abuse or violence is reported, necessary financial, medical, psychological and social assistance is provided to the victim; (b) The atmosphere of camaraderie is built so that victim is helped to get out of trauma, both physical and mental. " It may also be stated that a direction was given to set up an special cell at the State Level to bring coordination and effective control among supportive agencies for quick and scientific investigation in cases of sexual violence. If the State authorities would have taken care to follow the directions of this Court the unfortunate situation which has arisen in the instant case leading to filing of second F. I. R. of kidnapping of the prima witness in the rape case would not have arisen. It clearly appears that continued efforts are being made to tamper with the prime witness namely Sunita @ Santosh. What exact attempts are being made to tamper with the prima witness in the case are not known to us but we have been able to get only a glimpse of it. The prosecution agency in the rape case does not appear to be serious and giving full opportunity to the accused persons to tamper with the prime witness in a rape case. We expect from the State authorities to be more vigilant and take effective steps to ensure that the prime witness is not tampered with. If timely financial, psychological and social assistance would have been provided to the victim the development which has taken place subsequently would have been avoided. A little effort can be made to take out the victim from the trauma both physical and mental by sending her to Nari Niketan for some time. The State is expected to provide financial, medical and psychological assistance to Sunita @ Santosh.
(3.) TODAY the corpus Sunita @ Santosh is produced before us from the Nari Niketan. She has expressed her desire to stay with her parents. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 20. 9. 2006, Mr. V. S. Singh, Principal Secretary, Home as well as Mr. A. S. Gill, Director General of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur have filed separate affidavits. In both the affidavits, it is stated that the guidelines provided by this Court in Suo Moto vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. being D. B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No. 2856/2005 have been punctually and faithfully complied with. Some of the Circulars issued have been placed on record. In one of the Circular dated 18. 5. 2005, it is noted that the conviction ratio in the rape cases is between 27% to 30%. It is further pointed out that 64% cases have failed as the victims have gone hostile. 28% cases have been found to be of consent. 8% cases have failed because of lacunae in the investigation or some other reasons. Thus, it is apparent that in most of the rape cases, attempts are made to win over the victims so that they do not support the prosecution case in the Court and they are declared hostile. We have considered this aspect in Suo Moto case. Thus, it was emphasized that serious effort should be made by the State to provide necessary financial, medical, psychological and social assistance to the victim so that the she may said the truth before the Court. Unfortunately in the instant case, no such efforts were made by the State, which has resulted into giving a full opportunity to the accused persons to win over the prime witness. ;