Gujarat High Court Issues Notice On Father's Plea For Independent Probe Into Alleged Rape, Death Of 17-Yr-Old Daughter

The Gujarat High Court on Monday (December 8) issued notice on a Rajasthan resident's plea seeking an independent probe into the alleged rape and death of his 17-year-old daughter who had moved to the State to work as a labourer.

Justice MR Mengdey issued notice to the State and said, "Issue notice to respondent 1 and 4 returnable on 10-12-2025. In the interregnum the investigation is handed over to Deputy Superintendent Police, SDPO Mehsana and investigation shall be monitored by Superintendent of Police (SP), district Patan till the next date and Investigating Officer will submit report of investigation to this court day after tomorrow. The SP shall also file his affidavit in the present petition".

After the court issued notice, the State's counsel said, "My lord may say presently (it has) not gone into the merits so that it may not happen..."

To this the court orally said, "Otherwise, if we see the communication addressed to SP your SP is in direct contempt of Supreme Court. In Lalita Kumari the Supreme Court has said that if the cognizable offence is made out, it is mandatory for police authorities to register the FIR".

During the hearing, the State's counsel submitted that the allegations made by petitioner were first made when they had written to the SP and not prior to that when the case was investigated as accidental death.

"For the first time, before SP, allegation was raised about what they are now saying. Parallelly on the same day one group of persons visited SP here and one group visited Rajasthan police. SP had taken action...investigation was being taken care of by Police Sub Inspector. SP had thought it fit to transfer to Police Inspector. In the interregnum period Rajasthan Police had registered zero FIR and therefore it (FIR) came here," the counsel said.

"We had shown all sincerity and sensitivity while investigating accidental death. Despite that somehow on 1st (December) for first time they had met the SP. And for first time these allegations are levelled. That is how, considering that, SP transferred investigation from PSI to PI," he added.

He said that once the zero FIR was registered in Udaipur it was transferred to Unjha in Gujarat and was registered the next day.

"Investigation was taken over by PI and first thing PI had done was request Executive magistrate for re-inquest and forensic post mortem of dead body...we have again sent body for forensic FSL. If forensic FSL rules out possibility of what they(petitioner) are alleging, that is rape, then they will have to accept. It (report) will come tomorrow," he added.

Meanwhile the counsel for the petitioner father said, "We are dealing with a 17-year-old girl who comes from a family and who is a tribal. She had to travel from her village to Unjha for labour".

She submitted that the petitioner has made allegations against the person who brought the minor girl to Unjha, i.e. the labour contractor.

"He was the one who called the uncle, he arranged the car and in that car the daughter was sent. The mother looked at the body and said that is not right. If a daughter dies of fever or for something they have some superstitious, why would they loose their daily wages and run from Rajasthan to here for 10 days? The girl has travelled between Udaipur and Ahmedabad on as many times as she has not done in her life," she said.

She said that the body was brought to Unjha police station and the petitioner did not take the body to concerned Civil Hospital.

"We have very clearly stated in our memo of petition. In our memo we have stated that we have taken body to Unjha police station, the police station directed us to hospital. This whole story that we carried body to hospital, and the hospital called upon the police is something that needs to be investigated. It should not be taken as it is told," she added.

"Mere look at the body would be sufficient. Even if father was to say nothing has happened police officer has a duty to say no this has to be registered and investigation. These burn marks are done by someone else needs to be investigated...was this FIR registered here when we gave letter to SP? SP did not register. My complaint was to SP...," she said.

The counsel thereafter submitted that the petitioner is seeking investigation "done by a body independent of Unjha police".

"Investigation should be...not by Unjha police and be monitored by this Hon'ble court," the counsel said.

The matter is listed on December 10.