Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) By way of this miscellaneous petition, the petitioners have approached this Court assailing the order dated 12.06.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra in connection with FIR Case No. 106/2013 and Final Report No. 87/2013 whereby, the learned Sessions Judge rejected the final report submitted by the police and, while taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 366-A, 376-G IPC and Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act, against the petitioners directed that they be summoned through warrants of arrest.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that investigation was conducted by senior officials of the police department who found the case to be false. Scientific evidence by way of call details were collected by the I.O. which established beyond all manner of do but that the allegations of the prosecutrix are totally false. However, he contends that as the order taking cognizance on the FR is an ex-parte order, the petitioners be allowed to appear before the trial court and to raise all their contentions, at the stage of framing of charges. However, as per him, looking to the well supported finding recorded by the investigating officer in the final report to the effect that the case set up by the prosecutrix is false, the direction to summon the petitioners through warrants of arrest is unjustified. In support of this contention, he relies on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1 . He further contends that the complainant had filed a miscellaneous petition before this Court seeking a direction for fair investigation. The Additional Superintendent of Police, who investigated the case, was summoned by this Court during the course of hearing of the said miscellaneous petition. The I.O. submitted before the court that the allegations set up by the prosecutrix are belied by the call-details and the case is false. Thereafter, the Court refused to interfere in the matter. Thus, as per him, it is a fit case where this Court should exercise its inherent powers for modifying the mode of summoning of the petitioners as directed by the learned Sessions Judge and the warrants of arrest issued against the petitioners deserves to be converted to bailable warrants.
(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor supports the submissions advanced by the petitioners' counsel and contends that the senior officers of police, after thorough investigation, found the case to be false.;