“Do You Have Any Relative Who Has Been Raped? Only An Aggrieved Can Come To Court”, SC Judge To Petitioner-In-Person Lawyer While Dismissing Plea Relating To Unnao Rape

“Do You Have Any Relative Who Has Been Raped? Only An Aggrieved Can Come To Court”, SC Judge To Petitioner-In-Person Lawyer While Dismissing Plea Relating To Unnao Rape

The Supreme Court today dismissed a petition, which citing the Unnao rape case complained that “when the accused is powerful, No FIR has registered automatically” and sought some direction in this regard.

Petitioner Manohar Lal Sharma, an advocate practicing in the Supreme Court did not press his main prayer, that is demand for a CBI probe, as the agency has already taken up the case and registered four cases.

When Sharma questioned why when the accused is powerful FIRs have not registered automatically, the bench of justices S R Bobde and L Nageswara Rao asked him to approach the Allahabad High Court to raise his grievance.

“The High Court has already passed some order. You go to the jurisdiction police station. There cannot be a PIL in a criminal matter”, Bobde told Sharma.

But the real shocker came when Justice Bobde told Sharma: “Only an aggrieved person can come to court in such cases. Do you have any relative who has been raped?”

Sharma had filed the PIL last week seeking  CBI probe into the rape of a 16-year-old woman in Unnao, UP last year allegedly by a BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar and the custodial death of her father after allegedly assaulted by the rape accused’s brother.

The MLA’s brother Atul Singh Sengar has already been arrested by the UP police.

The state government has also constituted a special investigation team to probe the rape case.

Said the public interest litigation filed by advocate Manohar Lal Sharma: “The writ petition (PIL) under Art. 32 is being filed invoking fundamental right as guaranteed by the constitution of India for writ direction for C.B.I. investigation and prosecution u/s 302, 376, 363/366 r.w. 120-B of IPC against rape and custodial death, i.e. kidnapping, rape of a minor girl by the BJP M.L.A. and his companion and custodial death of her father via torture after their arrest upon protest by them, couple with further direction for protection and compensation to her and her family members in the interest of justice”

Sharma claimed he had filed a representation in this regard to the Chief Secretary of UP and CBI but it has not been acted upon. UP police cannot be trusted to conduct the probe in a free and fair manner, he contended.

“Because victim family is also entitled for similar compensation what has been provided in case of Nirbhaya gang rape i.e. Rs. 3 crore and government service to her family member couple with compensation and action for custodial death as directed by this Hon’ble Supreme Court from time to time”, said the petition.