Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Oct 1: Expressing anguish over the biased investigation, Principal Sessions Judge Kathua, M K Hanjura today directed further investigation in the gang-rape of minor girl by an officer to be nominated by SSP.
Looking into the gross irregularities in the investigation, the Court directed that a copy of the order should be sent to the Director General of Police and to the SSP Kathua, who may, if they deem it fit initiate appropriate action against the Investigating Officer for his acts of omission and commission.
According to the police case, the prosecutrix aged 16 years charged four males of gang-raping her at Madhrakki, tehsil Basohli during the intervening night of March 31, 2012 and April 1, 2012. The prosecutrix in her statement recorded on April 2, 2012 at Police Station Basohli accused Vipin alias Babloo and Dayalo of assaulting her sexually intermittently for the whole night without her consent inside a bus.
Vipin is said to have made her believe that he too was a Muslim and would marry her. This statement sends the police authorities into action. They registered a case under Section 363/376/342/109 RPC against the accused namely Vipin Kumar, Rashpal Singh, Sandura Ram and Dayalo, the owner of the bus.
During investigation, police authorities got the statement of the prosecutrix recorded on April 7, 2012 by a Magistrate under Section 164-A RPC and after completion of the investigation challan was presented against three accused namely Vipin Kumar, Rashpal Singh and Ajay Kumar.
After hearing Public Prosecutor Ravi Kumar Gupta appearing for the State and Advocate A Slathia appearing for the accused at charge/discharge stage, Principal Sessions Judge Kathua, M K Hanjura observed, “it is a stark reality that the crime against poor and the lower socio-economic classes are handled recklessly. These do not attract the attention either of the media or other agencies. The cases of rich and upper classes generally result in no official action and are handled by Inspectors and by Administrative hands or commissions.
“In the instant case, the female complainant makes a statement before the police authorities alleging gang-rape and she charged two persons Babloo and Dayalo of gang-raping her and the other two as abettors. After sometime a legal ritual is observed by the police by recording her statement under Section 161 CrPC. Not satisfied with this, they take her to a Magistrate who becomes a meek witness to that statement”, the Court said.
“This complainant now condescends to implicate only one accused. This gives the police ample field for acts of omission and commission the way their whim dictates, to settle scores or to make a few bucks or even a fast buck”, Principal Sessions Judge further observed, adding “they now chose which of the three remaining ones of, the accused to set-free and which to hold. They opt for the better deal; they set-free the bigger fish the owner of the bus, about whom the prosecutrix states in her two statements that he raped her in the bus for the whole night along with the other accused”.
The Court also castigated the role of the Superior Supervisory Officers and referred Rule 604 (5) of J&K Police Manual which deals with monitoring of investigation by the Superior Officers and observed that had investigation of the case been monitored, this unfortunate situation would not have arisen.
With these observations, Court ordered further investigation in the case.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel