Rohini POCSO Court seeks conclusive report from Delhi Police CP over delay, contradictory status reports in child sexual assault case

New Delhi [India], March 2 (ANI): A Special POCSO Court at Rohini has directed the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, to submit a conclusive and detailed report in a six-month-old case concerning the alleged sexual assault of a nine-year-old girl.
The Court also sought an explanation for the failure to file the charge sheet within the statutory period. The direction came after the Court found contradictions in successive police reports and expressed dissatisfaction despite replies having been filed by the SI, Inspector, DCP and Joint CP.

The order was passed on February 27, 2026, by Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO) Rajani Ranga in FIR registered at PS Mangol Puri on August 13, 2025. The case pertains to allegations that the accused, a senior medical officer employed at the Translational Health Science and Technology Institute, sexually assaulted the child on multiple occasions at her residence in West Delhi. The accused was known to the victim's mother and had previously served at reputed government medical institutions.
The FIR was registered under provisions relating to rape and criminal intimidation under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, along with relevant sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
During the proceedings, the Court examined two separate police reports that presented conflicting positions. A report received under the signatures "For Joint Commissioner of Police" stated that the investigation was still pending on several aspects, including examination of the victim's maternal grandmother, obtaining medical opinion on documents concerning the victim, and tracing and examining independent witnesses.
The police sought at least three weeks' time to complete the investigation.
However, the Court noted that an earlier report dated February 19, 2026, signed by the Additional DCP Outer District, Delhi, had stated that the case file was sent to the prosecution branch for scrutiny, objections raised by the Public Prosecutor had been complied with, the requisite investigation had been carried out, and the final report had been prepared and would be submitted before the Court at the earliest in accordance with law.
The Court observed that the earlier report gave a clear impression that the investigation had been completed, whereas the subsequent report disclosed that substantial aspects were still pending.
Appearing for the complainant, Advocate Aditi Drall submitted that nearly six months had elapsed since registration of the FIR and yet no charge sheet had been filed.
She further argued that in offences carrying punishment up to life imprisonment, the Investigating Officer has no authority in law to merely allow the accused to "join investigation" instead of taking appropriate coercive steps. The IO, however, placed a report on record stating that the accused had joined the investigation.
The Court recorded that despite repeated directions and reports sought from the IO, Inspector, DCP and Joint CP, the replies failed to satisfactorily clarify the actual status of the investigation. It also took note of the statutory mandate under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita requiring the filing of the police report within two months, observing that more than four months had already passed without submission of the final report before the Court.
In view of the delay and the contradictory stands reflected in the police communications, the Court directed that a conclusive report be called from the Commissioner of Police, Delhi. Copies of the present order, along with the earlier report dated February 19, 2026, and the latest report received, were directed to be sent for necessary intimation and compliance. The matter is now listed for further hearing on March 13, 2026. (ANI)