scorecardresearch
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeJudiciaryHC rejects law student’s allegations of bias, harassment against SIT in Chinmayanand...

HC rejects law student’s allegations of bias, harassment against SIT in Chinmayanand case

The woman has alleged the SIT, formed by UP government, had harassed & assaulted her family. But the Allahabad High Court isn’t convinced.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

New Delhi: The Allahabad High Court Thursday rejected allegations of bias and harassment against the special investigation team (SIT) formed by the Uttar Pradesh government to probe the Swami Chinmayanand sexual abuse case

A bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and Deepak Verma was hearing an application filed by the Shahjahanpur law student who has accused former Union minister and BJP leader Swami Chinmayanand of harassment. The former MP, the manager of the trust that runs the law college where she studied, has in turn accused her of extortion.

In her application to the Allahabad High Court, which is overseeing the trial on the directive of the Supreme Court, the woman had demanded the constitution of a fresh investigation team, and sought action against the officials of the existing SIT for allegedly harassing and assaulting her family members. 

She alleged that the SIT was biased, and that Chinmayanand had been offered “special treatment” through the course of the investigation, as if he were a “state guest”. 

The court, however, accepted the SIT’s contention that it could not have been biased as it had “strongly opposed” Chinmayanand’s bail application, which resulted in a lower court refusing to grant him bail. 

He was finally released on bail by the Allahabad High Court in February this year, when the court noted that it was unclear “who had used whom” in the case. 

Her charge that the SIT had tried to undermine the gravity of her allegations by allegedly focussing on the extortion case was also rejected. 

“This submission is outright rejected because an FIR was also there against Miss ‘A’ in respect of extortion therefore the investigating agency was under an obligation to investigate the matter keeping both sets of allegations in mind,” the court said. 


Also Read: 6 am massages, 2.30 pm ‘sex’ — law student recalls ‘horror sessions’ with Chinmayanand


‘Inevitable to apprise media about developments’

In her application, the law student pointed to a press conference held by the SIT last year, where they had referred to the extortion case. She claimed the press conference not only infringed upon her right to privacy but also “maligns her image in public so as to break her spirit”. 

However, the court said “in sensitive matters it may become inevitable to apprise the media about developments”. 

While cautioning the authorities to exercise restraint and restrict press conferences to discussing the status of an investigation, it observed, “However, merely because press conferences were held it would not mean that the investigation is tainted or was biased.”

She had also raised an objection against the fact that Chinmayanand had been charged with Section 376C (sexual intercourse by a person in authority) of the IPC and not Section 376 (rape). While Section 376C provides for a punishment of 5 to 10 years, Section 376 can attract a life term. 

The court, however, said the “investigating agency is free to form its own opinion as regards the offence found committed but that opinion is not binding on the court”. This charge, it said, can be altered even after the trial begins, and, hence, it would not comment on the charges at this stage. 

Another allegation made by the woman – that the SIT had not made any efforts to recover Chinmayanand’s mobile phone, on which he had allegedly filmed her while having a bath as well as the rape – was also dismissed.

The court said “merely because a mobile instrument was not recovered would not lead us to draw an inference that the investigation was not conducted properly or that the investigation was tainted”.


Also Read: ‘Virginity at stake’ but law student didn’t report abuse: What Chinmayanand’s bail order notes


Affidavit alleged harassment, assault

The Supreme Court had, in September last year, directed the Uttar Pradesh government to set up an SIT headed by an inspector general-rank officer to investigate the Chinmayanand case. 

The two-judge bench, comprising Justices R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, had also requested the Allahabad High Court chief justice to constitute a bench for monitoring the investigation in the two cross-FIRs lodged in the matter. 

A bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and Manju Rani subsequently began monitoring the investigation. This bench was kept in the loop through affidavits and reports. It had been informed that the investigation in both the FIRs had been completed and a final report filed in the trial court. It is on the basis of this final report that the court would take cognisance and initiate trial. 

The fresh affidavit filed by the law student contains several details of the harassment allegedly perpetrated by members of the SIT.

It claimed that one of the officers “banged her (the mother’s) head on the table, slapped her and beat her with fists and toes”. It also alleged that her father “was slapped and mercilessly beaten by the SIT during interrogation”.

Contending that they could not get a medical examination conducted as they were under the SIT’s “constant vigil”, she sought to submit mobile phone photographs purportedly depicting her mother’s injuries. 

The court, however, said there was no medical evidence to support these allegations. 

“Further, the photographs of the face of the mother of Miss A are not such from which any definite conclusion with regard to her custodial torture could be drawn,” it said. “We are, therefore, in these proceedings, not in a position to form a definite opinion as regards custodial torture of Miss A and her family.” 


Also Read: Accused of rape again, BJP’s UP strongman Chinmayanand always had a ‘loose’ reputation


 

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular