IAS vs IPS officers’ case: Delhi court accepts police’s closure report

New Delhi [India], October 11 (ANI): Delhi's Tis Hazari court has recently accepted the Delhi Police's closure report in a case against a senior IPS officer filed by a female IAS officer alleging misconduct. The court also dismissed the protest petition filed by the complainant against the closure report.
The Court noted that there was no similarity between the FIR and the statement of woman IAS officer recorded before the Magistrate.
Additional Chief judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Anuj Kumar Singh accepted the closure report and dismissed the protest petition filed by the complainant.
"There appears no similarity or commonality between FIR and statement under section 164 CrPC. The two do not appear to be against the same person," ACJM said in the order passed on October 7.
He further said, "The complainant's improvement that too at mighty scale after lapse of considerable time appears discrediting and suspicious,"
The court took note of closure report stating that the complainant substantially improved her version and IO did not believe the version of the complainant regarding apprehension of the safety from the accused
The closure report also stated that there is strong motive on complainant's part to falsely implicate the accused.
An FIR was filed in 2022 based on the woman IAS officer's complaint, in which she alleged receiving threatening calls and messages from an unknown number attempting to extract information from her.
During her statement before the Magistrate, she alleged that a senior IPS officer was sending inappropriate and suggestive messages to her and inviting her for a lunch and wine.
"Her complaint, on the basis of which the FIR was registered, was in writing, duly typed, and under the signatures of the complainant, does not even remotely convey the idea of sexual harassment, inappropriate behaviour, etc. On the face of it, the FIR appears to be a routine complaint concerning affairs of usual discharge of duty," the court said in the order passed on October 7.
On the other hand, the statement u/s 164 CrPC had taken a different turn altogether. It consists of multiple instances, details, names etc. It can be said that there appears no similarity or commonality between FIR and statement recorded before the magistrate, it added. (ANI)