'Haryana Police Tried To Protect Accused In 4-Year-Old's Rape Case' : Supreme Court Forms SIT

The Supreme Court today came down heavily on the Haryana police for derailing the investigation in the case of the rape of a 4-year-old girl in Gurugram, and constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to take over the investigation.

The Court observed that the police tried to dilute the gravity of the offence. Though there was prima facie evidence to indicate the offence of 'aggravated penetrative sexual assault' under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the police registered the FIR only for 'aggravated sexual assault' under Section 10, a lesser offence.

In a scathing order, the Court observed, "It's a glaring case where police have made all-out efforts to protect the accused."

"The entire police force, from the Commissioner to the Sub Inspector, made all attempts to prove that the child had no proof or that the parents did not make any sense. The record leaves no room for doubt that an offence under section 6 POCSO was apparently committed. The police however registered the FIR and downgraded the offence under section 10 due to undisclosed reasons."

The Court constituted an SIT led by a senior woman IPS officer in Haryana police - Nazneen Bhasin IPS. The Court directed that the Commissioner of Police, Gurugram and the investigating officer should be disassociated from the probe.

The Court also issued notice to the delinquent police officers to show cause why no disciplinary action should be taken against them.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi was hearing a writ petition filed by the parents of the child seeking investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation or a Special Investigation Team on the ground that the investigation by the Haryana police was unsatisfactory.

Process re-traumatized victim

The Court also flagged various problems in the process, which led to the re-traumatisation of the victim.

"Trauma and plight of the child was multiplied due to the insensitive, reckless, irresponsible and completely unlawful method of investigation having been adopted by Gurugram police," the Court noted in the order.

During the hearing, the bench, after perusing the report submitted by the State, expressed shock at the police investigaiton.

"If this is the quality of understanding sensitivity in case of a 4-yr old child, what do you expect of the rule of law? You say it's not a case of rape but assault? We are indicating what's distressing. Highest police officials taking that stance to bring down the offence to S.10! It's for courts to decide, not CWC" Justice Bagchi said.

"The way family and child have been harassed! Child went through more horrifying experience after what happened with her. Repeated victimization!" CJI Surya Kant noted.

"Worst form of disrespect to a victim!" Justice Bagchi added.

"You're disbelieving a 4 yr child... Shame on them! If the state has any respect for law, they will transfer them! The moment we take cognizance, you start arresting!" CJI said.

The Court was also critical of the Judicial Magistrate for not ensuring that the matter was investigated under Section 6.

Court slams the CWC

The Court also pulled up the members of the Child Welfare Committee for the insensitive manner in which they handled the child.

"Who appointed these CWC members? Acted as if the victim was a table or chair! They should have gone to her house," CJI Kant said.

In the order, the Court recorded that it has serious doubts as to whether the CWC members possessed the adequate educational and professional qualifications required to assist in such matters. The Court directed the CWC members to furnish their explanation. The Court also directed the Principal Secretary of Haryana to file an affidavit furnishing reasons for appointing them.

The Court also issued notice to a Doctor of Max Hospital to explain the reasons for changing the medical report prepared after examining the victim.

The Court had taken up the matter on Monday, after Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi mentioned the matter last Friday saying that it was a glaring case where a strong message must go from the Apex Court.

On March 23, the Court expressed strong disapproval of the manner in which the Haryana Police handled the investigation, terming the conduct of the probe "shocking" and insensitive. The Court also took serious note of the complaint that the Judicial Magistrate recorded the statement of the victim in close proximity to the accused persons.

It directed the Commissioner of Police, Gurugram and the Investigating Officer to remain personally present before the Court on March 25, with the complete record of the investigation. It further asked the Sessions Court, Gurugram, to obtain the comments of the Judicial Magistrate who recorded the child's statement. The State Advocate General was also asked to furnish the names of women IPS officers in the State.

Case : XXX v. STATE OF HARYANA | W.P.(Crl.) No. 123/2026