‘Rape and POCSO Charges Omitted from FIR’: Supreme Court Reprimands UP Police; Commissioner Summoned
Making scathing observations regarding the conduct of the Ghaziabad police, the Supreme Court stated that this represents a major failure of the system. The Court remarked that the police acted negligently in the investigation into the rape and murder of a 4-year-old girl. Furthermore, hospitals refused to admit the child. Consequently, the Court has summoned the Police Commissioner.
In Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, a 4-year-old girl was subjected to a brutal act of violence that ultimately claimed her life. However, the conduct of both the police and two hospitals involved in this case was so shameful that the Supreme Court was compelled to intervene personally. The Court issued a stern reprimand to the police and has summoned the Ghaziabad Police Commissioner to appear on April 13.
The victim was the 4-year-old daughter of a laborer in Ghaziabad. On March 16, a neighbor took the child away under the pretext of buying her chocolates. When the child failed to return for a considerable period, her father began searching for her. Upon finding her, the father discovered the child lying unconscious and covered in blood. She had been sexually assaulted.
The father rushed his blood-soaked daughter to two nearby private hospitals; however, both institutions refused to admit her. Eventually, the child was taken to a government hospital, where she was pronounced dead.
When the family reported the incident to the police, instead of offering assistance, the officers allegedly assaulted the family members and threatened them into silence. The FIR—the formal police complaint—was finally registered the following day, March 17, despite the incident having occurred on March 16.
What were the irregularities in the FIR?
The police registered the case in the FIR solely as one of murder. However, what had befallen the child clearly constituted sexual assault as well. Despite this fact, the police failed to include charges under the POCSO Act—the law designed to protect children from sexual offenses—or the specific charges related to rape within the FIR.
What happened to the accused?
The accused was apprehended on March 18. However, the police subsequently presented a rather bizarre narrative regarding the incident. The police stated that they were escorting the accused to the location where he had hidden a handkerchief. Upon reaching the spot, the accused opened fire on the police, prompting the police to return fire.
What did the Supreme Court say?
The matter reached the Supreme Court. Advocate N. Hariharan represented the child’s father. He presented video evidence to the Court showing the child alive, whereas the police report claimed that the child was already deceased by the time she was brought into their custody.
A bench comprising the CJI (Chief Justice) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul Pancholi heard the case. The CJI remarked that his heart was deeply distressed the moment he watched the video. The Court observed that, throughout this entire episode, both the private hospitals and the police displayed absolute callousness.
To whom did the Court issue notices?
The Court issued notices to the Government of Uttar Pradesh, the Station House Officer (SHO) of the Nandgram Police Station, both private hospitals involved, and the Executive Magistrate. The Police Commissioner of Ghaziabad and the Station House Officer have been ordered to appear personally before the Supreme Court on April 13.
What happens next?
The Court directed that the investigation into this case be conducted under its supervision by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or a central agency. The Court further ordered that the victim’s family must not be subjected to any further harassment by the police. Additionally, the identities of the child and her family must not be disclosed.
