Constitution of India:
Art. 32 – Writ Petition – Seeking fair investigation in a case of brutal gangrape and murder in the State of Uttar Pradesh – Petitioners alleged that cremation of the victim was illegal – The State in its affidavit stated that the investigation was entrusted to CBI by the State – Held: Supreme Court is not required to monitor the proceedings/ investigation because the High Court having competent jurisdiction has adequately delved into the aspects of fair investigation – Therefore, all aspects are left open to be considered by the High Court – Though sufficient steps have been taken to protect the family of the victim by State Police, however, in the facts of the case, CRPF is directed to take over the protection of victim’s family and witnesses – The aspect of appointment of Special Public Prosecutor would be considered by the High Court – The issue as to whether the trial of the case is to be transferred to Delhi from Uttar Pradesh, is kept open to be considered if need arises in future.
Penal Code, 1860:
s. 228A – Disclosure of names and relationship of family members of rape victim – In the judicial order – Held: is against law.
Disposing of the Writ Petitions and the intervention applications, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The undisputed fact is that the investigation has in fact been entrusted by the State Government itself to the CBI on 10.10.2020 and the CBI has started investigation in respect of the crime on 11.10.2020. Therefore, the apprehensions expressed by the petitioners/applicants that there would be no proper investigation if the Uttar Pradesh Police conducted the same would not remain open for consideration at this stage and the grievance to that extent stands redressed. [Para 10][527-CE]
1.2 From the order passed by the High Court of Allahabad in the PIL, it is noticed that the High Court has adequately delved into the aspects relating to the case to secure fair investigation and has also secured the presence of the father, mother, brother and sister-in-law of the victim and appropriate orders are being passed, including securing reports from various quarters. In that circumstance, it is not necessary to divest the High Court of the proceedings and take upon this Court to monitor the proceedings/investigation. That apart, the incident having occurred within the jurisdiction of that High Court and all particulars being available, it would be appropriate for the High Court to proceed to monitor the investigation in the manner in which it would desire. In that view, it would be open for the writ petitioners/applicants to seek to intervene in the matter before the High Court subject to consideration of such request by the High Court and if it finds the need to take into consideration the contentions to be urged by the petitioners/applicants in that regard. [Para 10][527-E-H]
1.3 Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions, all aspects of the matter are left open to be considered by the High Court in PIL(C) No.16150/2020 relating to the incident regarding which the investigation is to be conducted by the CBI and also with regard to the grievance put forth alleging illegal cremation. The CBI shall report to the High Court in the manner as would be directed by the High Court through its orders from time to time. [Paras 13 and 14][528-E-H]
2.1 Insofar as the protection to the victim’s family and the witnesses, the affidavit, as filed, no doubt indicates that sufficient steps have been taken by the State Government to provide protection. However, in a matter of the present nature, without casting any aspersions on the security personnel of the State Police; in order to allay all apprehensions and only as a confidence building measure, it would be appropriate to direct that the security to the victim’s family and the witnesses shall be provided by the CRPF. [Paras 11 and 12][528-A-D]
2.2. Respondent No.2 (Chief Secretary, State of U.P) in WP(Crl) No.296/2020 shall bring this order to the notice of the competent officer of the CRPF forthwith with a request to provide adequate security to the victim’s family and the witnesses and the CRPF shall take steps to provide the same and shall report the same to the High Court. [Para 14][529-A-B]
3. There is no need to pass any specific order as regards appointment of a Special Public Prosecutor. This is an aspect which could be considered by the High Court in the light of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. In the circumstance wherein the family members of the victim have chosen to engage their private Advocates, they would consider these aspects and make request on behalf of the victim in accordance with law if such need arises. [Para 13][528-F-G]
4. Insofar as the transfer of the case to Delhi is concerned, it would be appropriate for investigating agency to complete the investigation and in any event since the local police have been divested of the investigation and the CBI is carrying out the investigation, there would be no room for apprehensions at this stage. However, the issue as to whether the trial of the case is to be transferred, is a matter which is kept open to be considered if need arises in future. [Para 15][529-B-C]
5. The name and relationship of the family members with the victim have been depicted in the face of the order dated 12.10.2020 passed by the High Court in PIL(C) No.16150/2020. Since it is a requirement of law to avoid such disclosure, the High Court is requested to delete the same and also morph the same in the digital records and avoid indication of such contents in future. [Para 16][529-D-E]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.