Hathras Gang Rape & Murder Case: Allahabad HC Flags Suspended SHO's Insensitivity, Denies Relief Over 'Dereliction' Of Duty

The Allahabad High Court last week dismissed a petition filed by suspended-Station House Officer (SHO) Dinesh Kumar Verma seeking to quash criminal proceedings including the summoning order in connection with the 2020 Hathras gang rape and murder case, wherein he has been booked over allegations of dereliction of official duty. A bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh criticised the officer's conduct as it took into account both procedural violations and a glaring lack of sensitivity in handling the case involving a 19-year-old Dalit woman, a gang rape survivor, who later succumbed to her injuries. The Accused (the then SHO, Hathras) is currently facing CBI's charge-sheet for offence under Sections 166A(b)(c) [failure to record information given to him under S. 154 CrPC concerning sexual offences] and 167 [Public servant framing an incorrect document with intent to cause injury] of the IPC. In brief, as per the chargesheet, the accused-applicant failed to stop the media or local reporters from approaching the victim and capturing her photographs and video inside the police station, despite it being his duty to safeguard the dignity of a sexual offence survivor. Allegedly, when the victim was brought to the police station, her video was recorded by the applicant on his mobile phone, but he failed to refer her for a sexual assault examination, despite her claiming that she had been sexually assaulted Additionally, he also refused to take the severely injured victim to the hospital either via a police vehicle or ambulance, and instead, he compelled her family to arrange a shared auto-rickshaw for transport, despite the availability of police vehicles. CBI's investigation alleged that, at his instance, false entries were made in the General Diary, including claims that a lady constable was sent to examine the victim's injuries, even though the constable arrived after the victim had already been taken to the hospital. The chargesheet also claimed that, without examining the victim's injuries, false entries were made stating that there were no injuries on her body. Also, the accused-applicant failed to register a case on the basis of the statement of the victim. Concluding that the applicant failed to act as mandated by law, rules and guidelines, the CBI filed a chargesheet against him, challenging which he moved the HC. It was contended by his counsel that there was no evidence of unlawful conduct by the applicant, who managed the situation without causing panic, despite the victim being suddenly brought to the police station amid a crowd and media presence. It was also submitted before the bench that the applicant did not doubt the victim's family and immediately sent her to the hospital without examining the sexual assault issue and that it was a human erorr that he did not pay heed to the word "jabardasti" uttered by the victim while claiming that she had been sexually assaulted. His counsel further argued that the General diary of the police station is being maintained as per provisions of Section 44 of the Police Act and that any wrong entry or non-entry would not create any material effect on the case of prosecution, and it can only be termed an irregularity and not an illegality. On the other hand, the Deputy Solicitor General appearing for CBI, while reiterating the allegations against the applicant, raised an objection that since charges have already been framed by the trial court in the case, therefore, he appropriate remedy against the order of charge is to file a revision and not a Section 482 CrPC plea. At the outset, the court discarded the argument against the maintainability of the instant plea, as it observed that the availability of an alternate remedy of filing an appeal is not an absolute bar in entertaining a petition under Section 482 CrPC. The Court, however, stressed that at the stage of charge/discharge, it has a very limited jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC and it can is only required to consider “whether any sufficient material is available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not”. Upon examining the chargesheet and taking into account the chronology of the events, the bench identified two specific lapses in duty by the SHO in handling the case: While the video of the victim which was prepared by the applicant in his mobile phone, it was clear that it was a case of molestation, he failed to protect the identity of the victim and did not stop any media person from contacting the victim and taking her photographs and making her video, thereby violating the SOP of the Ministry of Home AffairsFalse entries were made in the General Diary by stating that a lady constable was sent for the victim's medical examination, which was not the case and that there were no injury marks on her, which was found to be untrue. Importantly,...

Hathras Gang Rape & Murder Case: Allahabad HC Flags Suspended SHO's Insensitivity, Denies Relief Over 'Dereliction' Of Duty

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags