Lucknow/Banda: Children as young as five were lured into the house with food, money or mobile phone access, and sexually abused by both husband and wife. The abuse was filmed and the recordings sold online through encrypted platforms and the dark web, accessed in as many as 47 countries.
The judgement of a special POCSO court in UP’s Banda that sentenced a couple to death for sexually abusing minor boys for nearly a decade details chilling testimonies by children about how their neighbourhood “uncle” Ram Bhavan and “aunty” Durgawati sexually assaulted and filmed them, threatening to kill them if they told their parents.
According to the judgment copy, accessed by ThePrint, the sexual abuse happened between 2010 and 2020. The victims, aged between 5 and 15, were from poorer families in the neighbourhood; some even close relatives.
Referring to it as a “rarest of rare” cases, the court said evidence at hand established that the couple was beyond the “possibility of reformation”.
“If these convicts are not awarded the death penalty, it would erode society’s faith in justice and create fear among children. Therefore, they must be hanged. Both shall be hanged till death,” the court observed, adding that this was not an isolated incident but a continuing pattern.
The judgment said school records and birth certificates were produced to establish that several victims were under 12 years old when the offences occurred. The court observed that under the POCSO Act, the age of the child is a determinative factor in categorising the offence as aggravated.
The wife, Durgavati, initially denied all charges in court, claiming she was being falsely implicated on account of a family dispute. She told the court that she had neither committed any offence against a child nor recorded or circulated any objectionable photographs or videos.
But the court held her guilty of abetment and criminal conspiracy. For this, it relied on the statements of survivors, one of whom stated during the deposition: “Aunty was in the house. She knew what was happening.”
Also Read: With order on child pornography, SC clarifies meaning of ‘storage’ & ‘possession’ under POCSO
‘Threatened to kill me if I told my parents’
The survivors’ testimony was a key pillar of the prosecution’s case.
The special POCSO court observed that the testimonies were consistent, detailed and mutually corroborative, and were firmly supported by medical and electronic evidence. It reiterated that the testimony of a child survivor, if credible and trustworthy, does not require independent corroboration.
The court also relied substantially on medical examination reports prepared by doctors, which recorded injuries consistent with repeated penetrative sexual assault. Medical evidence, while not always showing fresh injuries due to time lapsed, did not contradict the survivors’ accounts.
Cited in the judgment, one survivor told the special POCSO court in Banda: “My uncle Ram Bhavan and aunt Durgavati made me play TV games. Uncle had many phones and a camera. He forced me into sexual acts, continuing for over a year. The first abuse happened when I was just nine.”
“He said if I told my parents, he would kill me. I was very scared and did not understand what was happening,” said another survivor.
One survivor said Durgawati also sexually abused him. “My aunt abused me sexually on Uncle Ram Bhavan’s orders. They both forced me into acts for days. They did the same to other children.”
In another statement recorded in the judgment, another survivor said the wife was equally complicit in the abuse. “Durgawati aunty lives in the same house. She knew what was happening inside the room when Ram Bhavan uncle abused me. She did not come to rescue me. Sometimes we even screamed, but she did not come. That clearly means she was involved.”
Tip-off from interpol
The case surfaced in 2020 after Interpol alerted Indian authorities that someone was using three mobile numbers to distribute child pornographic material online. According to Kamal Singh, a lawyer associated with the POCSO court, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) took over the probe and registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Ram Bhavan, a junior engineer in the irrigation department in Banda, on 31 October, 2020.
The CBI arrested him on 17 November, 2020. His wife, Durgawati, was also taken into custody on charges of influencing witnesses and pressuring the survivors’ families to reach a compromise.
The CBI filed a nearly 700-page charge sheet in a Banda court, relying on medical reports and statements of 74 people between the ages of five and 42. They included the testimony of more than 30 minor survivors.
During a search of Ram Bhavan’s residence in Banda, the CBI reportedly recovered explicit photographs of children, a camera, pen drives, mobile phones, recording equipment, a diary, and around Rs 8.27 lakh in cash.
A pen drive containing explicit videos and 679 photographs of children from Banda, Chitrakoot and nearby districts was also recovered.
Ram Bhavan during interrogation confessed to creating an email ID, which he used to distribute child pornographic material online.
In court, forensic experts testified on the extraction and authentication of electronic data, as well as the linking of email accounts and mobile numbers to Ram Bhavan and Durgavati.
The court underscored that electronic evidence, when collected and certified according to law, is admissible and can form the basis of a conviction. It also said that recording and storing the acts, and sharing them through electronic means added a further layer of criminality.
In addition to imposing the death sentence, the court directed that each of the affected children be provided with financial assistance of Rs 10 lakh. It further ordered that the Rs 8 lakh recovered from Ram Bhavan and Durgavati’s residence be distributed equally among the survivors.
Bhoora Prasad Nishad, the couple’s lawyer, told ThePrint Monday, “Injustice has happened to my clients, and we will now move the high court.
“If any harassment had taken place, why didn’t the victim’s family come forward to file the FIR themselves? Why are the parents not being allowed to speak to the media? There are many loopholes in the case, and we will raise these points in the high court.”
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)
Also Read: Child pornography gets a watertight definition in Modi govt’s POCSO amendment bill