Bangalore: French Consulate official Pascal Mazurier has written to Police Commissioner B G Jyothiprakash Mirji, seeking a thorough probe into the case involving the rape of his minor daughter, in which he is the accused.
Pascal, Consular Attache at the Consulate General of France here, said the Karnataka High Court had granted him bail last month on the basis of DNA tests results and testimonies of several witnesses, police sources said.
He said although the DNA test results had been known since July, it seemed as if nobody was trying to find who the abuser is. His wife, instead of being relieved by the DNA results, had ignored them, criticised police and had not even bothered to look for the identity of the abuser.
In his letter to the city police chief, he said he had spent four months in jail, during which his children had been 'exposed' to those who framed him. He demanded to know why so many 'disturbing' facts about his wife Suja John's declarations and statements had been taken for granted.
Pascal alleged his wife had falsely accused him and given false statements to police and the family court. "I am confident police could reveal the truth about the case, in which I have been publicly insulted and threatened, should you intervene and direct an investigation."
He said the DNA report clearly excluded his participation in the alleged rape. Since the report 'indirectly indicates' that his daughter was sexually abused, I am 'extremely worried' for her, for her health and safety and well as for my two minor sons," Pascal said.
He said in view of the report he presumes "some other male person has access to my daughter in my absence and might have committed this grave offence.
"I wonder why my wife is not trying to discover who is the owner of the sperm found on my daughter. This male person may be a friend of my wife or some other person probably belonging to the entourage of our daughter."
On October 17, the high Court had granted conditional bail to Pascal, arrested for allegedly raping his minor daughter, observing that the circumstantial evidence did not "specify" he had committed the offence.
Published Date: Nov 08, 2012 02:55 pm | Updated Date: Nov 08, 2012 03:01 pm