New Delhi: A Delhi court has rapped the police for filing two separate charge-sheets in the alleged rape case of a minor girl, and said that the investigation conducted so far in the matter is nothing but a “mockery”. “It is a big slap on the Delhi Police’s logo of “Shanti, Seva, Nyay”, the court remarked.According to LiveLaw, the court had earlier directed the Commissioner of Police to initiate an inquiry and register a case under appropriate provisions against the officers for committing fraud upon the court.Additional Sessions Judge Gaurav Rao observed: “If this continues, and the officials are not dealt with sternly, the public shall loose their faith in the police system. They not only have mocked the court/judicial system but also abused their power qua the people they have pledged to serve and protect.”The accused was arrested in March for allegedly raping and kidnapping a 14-year-old girl. The first information report (FIR) was registered under Sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage), 376 (Rape), 342 (wrongful confinement) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.Also read: Police Abuse the Laws Because the Laws Are Designed to Be AbusedThe news report said that one set of the chargesheet in the matter was filed with the court and accused’s counsel, while the other was filed with the public prosecutor and complainant’s counsel, wherein material facts were allegedly omitted.It said, “Most importantly and what the DCP has failed to justify and explain is the omission of two complete paragraphs running into 20-25 lines from the charge sheet. which paragraphs were giving clean chit to the accused and fixing liability/responsibility/involvement of one another individual namely Umer whose name was completely deleted/omitted from the charge sheet filed in the court. How can the said action be justified and what more is required to hold that it was deliberate, motivated and malafide.”The court also observed that one charge-sheet mentioned that the location of mobile phone of the accused was not found at the crime scene. However, this was omitted in the charge-sheet filed in the court.Apart from this omission, the court further noted that the fact of victim visiting the crime scene with one Umer was also omitted in the charge-sheet filed in the court.