'Shocking' : Supreme Court Slams Haryana Police For Insensitive Probe Into Rape Of 3-Year-Old Girl

The Supreme Court on Monday expressed strong disapproval of the manner in which the Haryana Police handled the investigation into the rape of a three-year-old girl, 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.

The Court 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. The Court 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.

The Court also noted in its order that the averments in the affidavit filed by the parent of the child suggested a "very disturbing manner in which the victim was examined in the Court."

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.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for the petitioners, submitted that the investigating officer was persuading the parents to withdraw the FIR. He added that the Magistrate took the child's statement when the accused persons were present in the anteroom, though the law says the accused cannot be in close proximity to the victim.

"Magistrate is telling the girl oath toh isko samajh nahi ayega..but magistrate is telling a three-year-old girl..sach bolo sach bolo..accused were there. The accused cannot be in close proximity of the child," Rohatgi submitted.

Rohatgi added that the investigating officer, a woman, was asking the parents to withdraw the case. Rohatgi added that the investigating officer was suspended for taking bribe in another POCSO case.

"What kind of insensitive has the police become? In a so-called metropolitan city, this is happening! You are dealing with a traumatised child," CJI Kant observed.

The CJI was also shocked to note that the police asked the parents what they wanted to do. "Shocking thing. The police inspector asking the parents, what do you want? Is it not their duty to register FIR? Don't they understand the basics of the law?"

Rohatgi submitted that the child was shuttled between the police station, the Child Welfare Committee office, Magistrate's court and the hospital across days. "We requested home visit. SI reacted with irritation that we were being difficult," Rohatgi said.

Rohatgi urged that the Supreme Court should lay down guidelines to ensure that the pre-trial steps are done in a sensitive manner, considering the recent trauma of the victim.

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

Appearance for petitioner: Sr. Advocate Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Abhimanyu Bhandari, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Mishra, Adv. Ms. Namisha Gupta, AOR Pranay Chitale, Adv. Parth Sarathi, Adv. Aditya Dutta