scorecardresearch
Friday, March 29, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeIndia‘No confirmation of rape, woman may have been tutored’: What special ST-SC...

‘No confirmation of rape, woman may have been tutored’: What special ST-SC court said in Hathras case

The court called the 19-year-old woman’s death an 'accident' and acquitted 3 of the 4 accused. Both victim and convicts' families plan to challenge the verdict.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

Hathras: For the special ST-SC court in Hathras, the gangrape-cum-murder of a 19-year-old Dalit woman two years ago was a case of “accident”.

The court of Special Judge Trilok Pal Singh gave this finding last Thursday while acquitting three — Ramu, Lavkush, and Ravi — of the four persons from the upper caste community, who were arrested and charged with murder as well as for offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. ThePrint has a copy of the verdict.

According to additional sessions judge Trilok Singh, the prosecution failed to establish the crime “beyond reasonable doubt”.

Only one accused, Sandeep, was found guilty, albeit for a lesser offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Sandeep was convicted under section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act which punishes someone who commits any criminal offence against a person on the ground that such person is a member of the SC/ST community. The court sentenced Sandeep to life imprisonment.

However, with the court observing that the prosecution had failed to prove that an act of rape was committed against the victim, Sandeep was set free of the sexual offence charge. The court relied on the woman’s video, which also went viral soon after the incident, in which she is heard naming Sandeep as the perpetrator who injured her neck. The injuries led to severe spinal injuries and the woman’s death. In the same video, she can also be heard denying that she was assaulted sexually.

The court, therefore, imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on Sandeep, of which Rs 40,000 shall be given to Rama Devi, the victim’s mother. If Sandeep defaults in paying fine, he will be liable to further imprisonment of two years. Since he was already in jail for about 30 months, the equivalent time will be adjusted in his prison term.

With the court having ruled out the possibility of rape in this case, and the victim’s death as accidental, the victim’s family plans to appeal against the judgment in the high court. Sandeep’s family also plans to file an appeal against this judgment, claiming that the sentence of life imprisonment was very harsh and that he was innocent. 


Also read: Pawan Khera’s remarks on Modi part of ‘conspiracy’ to destabilise nation: Assam Police to SC


The case

The Hathras case snowballed into a controversy, particularly when the UP Police cremated the woman in the dead of the night without informing her family. The police had arrested the upper-caste men for allegedly raping and brutally assaulting the woman in Hathras on 14 September, 2020. She had suffered multiple fractures, a spinal injury, and a deep cut on her tongue.

Taking suo motu cognizance of the incident and the events leading up to the victim’s cremation, the Allahabad High Court transferred the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for further investigation.

However, the UP administration always denied that the woman was raped. This assertion was based on a forensic lab report stating there were no traces of sperm in the samples taken from the victim.

In his 167-page order, the special judge of SC/ST court particularly noted that in the initial complaint to the police, the woman had named Sandeep. The others were named eight days after the incident, which, according to the court, was “after being coached by her relatives and other people who were coming to meet her.”

Discarding the theory of gang-rape or rape, the judge noted, “While getting her statement recorded five days after the incident, the victim did not mention that she had been raped, and neither did she mention the names of any other accused apart from Sandeep.” 

The prosecution case was also not supported by medical evidence, the court noted. “….none of the medical tests of the victim have indicated that she had been raped. The MIMB (Multi-Institutional Medical Board) team has also not confirmed that the victim was raped,” held the court. 

The medical examination report did not even confirm the police theory that she was strangled, the court found.

Ruling the victim’s death as accidental, the judge said, “as per the recorded evidence, there were no strangulation marks found on the victim’s neck, and a ligature mark was found only in the front of the neck, while if she had been strangulated, the ligature mark would have been all around her neck.”

He also reasoned why strangulation could not have been the cause of death in the case, as recorded by the prosecution.

“Normally during strangulation, the victim dies within a few minutes but in this case, the death of the victim, which is due to the fracture of her cervical due to a forceful blow to her neck, has been caused by the subsequent complications, which have happened with a lot of delays. It is true that the team of MIMB has expressed a definite opinion that the injury of C-6 (vertebra) is possible due to a sudden jerk and it is not possible due to direct injury. It is also true that the injuries on the victim’s body are most likely to have been caused by only one person.”

Terming the death as ‘accidental’, the judge recorded, “in this case, the victim continued to talk till eight days after the incident and had been speaking, therefore, it cannot be said that the accused’s intention was definitely to kill the victim. Therefore, the above act of accused Sandeep comes under Section 304 Part-1 IPC of punishable offence, not under section 302 IPC .”

(Edited by Smriti Sinha)


Also read: End ‘long’ court vacations, make judges declare assets — parliamentary panel members


 

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