New Delhi: More than three years after a seven-year-old boy was killed in a private school in Gurugram, the trial in the case is yet to begin.
The CBI had charged a class 11 student of the same school for allegedly murdering the boy on 8 September 2017. However, several legal entanglements in related cases have delayed the commencement of the trial.
In 2019, the Supreme Court had directed status quo in the case and also put on hold separate proceedings pending against the then juvenile accused. The SC is yet to decide whether the accused, who turned 18 in 2019, should be prosecuted as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice Act or as an adult under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Furthermore, CBI’s request to the Haryana government to allow it to prosecute four Gurugram police personnel for botching up the initial investigation of the case has also been pending for the past six months and further delayed the commencement of the trial.
The Gurugram police had arrested a school bus conductor, Ashok Kumar, for allegedly sexually assaulting and murdering the class 2 student. Kumar was later given a clean chit by the CBI after no evidence was found against him.
On 2 February, a special CBI court in Panchkula came down heavily on the state government and the police for “sleeping like a Khumbhkaran” instead of “discharging their statutory duties”.
Special Judge Aman Inder Singh observed that the authorities were not taking action to protect their colleagues and at the same time were also not rejecting the request for sanction, fearing judicial scrutiny.
Also read: A life too short: Pradyuman’s parents hold on to fleeting memories
Family drained by multiple delays
Meanwhile, the multiple proceedings and delays have drained the deceased boy’s family.
The victim’s father Barun Thakur told ThePrint: “At present, the case keeps juggling between courts in four different cities — Supreme Court in Delhi, Punjab and Haryana High Court in Chandigarh, special CBI court in Panchkula and the Gurugram Juvenile Justice Board.”
As the complainant, Thakur participated in every case, from opposing the accused persons’ bail application to contesting the petition to try him as a juvenile.
“Running from one court to another has left me frustrated. But I will keep fighting to get justice for my child,” Thakur said.
On the Haryana government delaying sanction to prosecute the policemen, Thakur said the state is protecting its own officials.
His advocate Sushil Tekriwal added: “The is a glaring example that shows how meticulously the police had planned to send an innocent person to jail.”
The police had arrested Kumar on the same day as the murder. However, dissatisfied with the investigation, Thakur had approached the Supreme Court to transfer the investigation to the CBI. The Haryana government itself transferred the case to the investigative agency after widespread public outrage with the police probe in 2017.
The CBI arrested the juvenile, who had allegedly slit the throat of the child with a knife to kill him.
Following a CBI charge sheet against the teen, the conductor was discharged in the case on 28 February 2018, while a probe was undertaken against four police officers, including ACP Birem Singh.
As a result, two separate proceedings began, one against the juvenile before the Gurugram Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) and the second involving police personnel before Panchkula special CBI court.
Also read: Skill India reaches out to juvenile offenders, starts training them for jobs
SC yet to take decision on juvenile accused
According to Thakur, the CBI has filed an application before the Punjab and Haryana High Court to transfer the case from the juvenile board to the Panchkula court.
However, Thakur said, the trial against the juvenile cannot commence until the top court decides his petition on the status of the accused — whether he should be treated as a juvenile or an adult for the crime.
In December 2017, the JJB had declared the delinquent to be mentally and physiologically fit to be tried as an adult.
The following year, on 11 October 2018, the Punjab and Haryana High Court had asked the board to decide afresh whether the teenager was to be tried as an adult.
A petition was then filed before the Supreme Court on this matter and the top court stayed proceedings before the board on 19 November 2019.
The accused was earlier lodged at an observation home in Faridabad but was moved to a home in Karnal after he turned 18, where he will stay till he turns 21. His regular bail plea was rejected in September 2020 by the SC.
Meanwhile, the victim’s advocate Tekriwal said the four accused policemen were never arrested in the case.
“On 6 January, 2021 the CBI filed its supplementary charge sheet against them before the Panchkula special CBI court. We have not yet received a copy because the court is yet to take cognisance of it, which can be done only when the prosecution sanction is there,” Tekriwal told ThePrint.
In its charge sheet, the CBI said there was “sufficient evidence” for prosecution against the four police personnel who allegedly implicated the bus conductor in the case.
The Panchkula special court, on 2 February, slammed the state government for not responding to the CBI’s request for prosecution sanction.
“The accused four police officials virtually made life hell for Ashok Kumar (the conductor) and put his entire family on the brink of starvation. The incident gave a bad name to him in the society and put a blot on his career, which will take time to vanish,” the court said.
It added: “The best solace for this person in the scenario will be that the accused person who were responsible for his plight should face prosecution and law should take its course, but to my utter surprise, the concerned sanctioning authorities are sitting upon the request.”
Special Judge Aman Inder Singh directed that the requisite action should be taken within 10 days.
Also read: ‘Educated’ juveniles committed crimes more than the ‘illiterate’ ones in 2017, says NCRB
Inefficient and insensitive investigation and follow up is hallmark and when it it gets a touch of influence then the 6/ 7 years on an alleged case of rape does not come up. Left to its own just as the juvenile could be tried when he becomes a senior citizen, middle-aged accused of rape could be tried on his natural death bed.