QUOTA STIR: HC RAP FOR HARYANA GOVT

Bench of justices SS Saron and Arun Palli observes while state was telling them probe is on, it was filing cancellation report in trial court

The Haryana government’s handling of investigations into alleged ‘Murthal gangapes’ came under severe criticism on Saturday, with the Punjab and Haryana HC observing that the state was taking “contradictory” stand. Amicus curiae Anupam Gupta apprised the court of a report filed by Sonepat additional district and sessions judge Gagan Geet Kaur, who had termed the investigation an “eyewash”.

The Haryana government’s handling of investigations into alleged Murthal gangapes came under severe criticism on Saturday, with the Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) observing that the state was taking “contradictory” stand before the HC and trial courts.

As the hearing began, the impartial adviser (amicus curiae), Anupam Gupta, apprised the court of a report filed by Sonepat additional district and sessions judge Gagan Geet Kaur, who had termed the investigation an “eyewash”.

Observing that the state was saying in the HC that investigations were underway, but in trial court, it was filing cancellation report against accused persons, the bench of justices SS Saron and Arun Palli — perusing the report of a lower court — questioned additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who appeared for Haryana: “You are keeping everyone in dark... It is very disturbing, you are filing cancellation report (without informing the HC). There appears inconsistency in (your) stand taken before the HC and there (trial court).”

During the hearing, it transpired that a supplementary challan was filed in a lower court and sections of gangrape invoked against the accused persons were deleted. However, the HC was not informed about these developments, even as it is monitoring the case.

The report of additional district and sessions judge had stated that before the charges were to be framed against the accused persons, the court found several shortcomings in the challan. In the investigation, these shortcomings were “overlooked/ ignored intentionally deliberately and malafidely (sic)”.

It was also stated that the section of gangrape was deleted on the basis of a DNA report only, without waiting for the CCTV footage report from the Central Forensic Lab and without making any sincere efforts to trace the prosecutrix.

The report also said that three witnesses’ statements taken before a magistrate were produced in a sealed report with supplementary challan, but earlier, the police had disowned the same. The lower court had also questioned the manner in which the statements were recorded. “Though it is well settled that investigation is a domain of police but court cannot close its eyes when the investigation is nothing but an eyewash,” the lower court had recorded in an order passed on September 20, questioning the manner of investigation.

PROBE NOT OVER YET: GOVT COUNSEL

Tushar Mehta clarified that the investigation into the case had not been closed. “So far it is not made out against the five persons. Hence, section (376-D) of (IPC) had been deleted against them. But investigation is very much on,” Mehta stressed. “The problem is, we don’t have victim, so we can’t find the accused,” he added.

Later, the court seeking a report on the contradictions in stand taken before the HC and lower court asked the government not to file a final report before producing the same in the HC.

The HC had taken suo motu note of reports of alleged gangrapes in February 2016. The sections of alleged gangrapes were added in April, and later five persons booked for other offences were also booked for gangrape. After the DNA report of their semen, the police deleted sections of gangrape against them.