petitioner in presence of Ms. Rama and complainant’s mother. However, the petitioner refused to undergo internal gynaecological medical examination. Further the petitioner in her statement mentioned that the mother of the accused was not agreeable on some issues regarding the petitioner’s marriage with the accused. Therefore she had made the call. She had also stated that she had established physical relations with Pradeep with her own consent and free will and did not want Police Action. Though the petitioner solemnized the marriage on 22nd September, 2014 but she did not disclose this fact in any of her statements and lodged a fresh complaint of rape against Pradeep. On the fresh complaint lodged FIR No.497/2014 as noted above was registered and charge-sheet has already been filed. Despite detailed enquiry no dereliction of duty was found against the investigating officer. As regards the subsequent alleged action of the people who trespassed into the house of complainant and the Police officers and NGO worker, complaints has already been filed by the petitioner before the Court. 5. Since the version of the complainant in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is before the Court, thus any appropriate action which is warranted is for the Court concerned to take and no further investigation is warranted nor can this Court direct de-novo investigation in the facts and circumstances of the case based on the averments in the petition. 6. Petition and applications are accordingly dismissed.
