Grant,Waters arrest imminent today

While the police maintain they are still waiting for a copy of the apex court’s judgment before they take further action,sources revealed they had initiated the procedure necessary for the arrests and would be in a position to effect the arrest on Monday. The duo’s lawyer has also advised them to surrender to the police.

“The hard copy of the judgment would reach us by Monday and only after that would we be able to arrest the duo,” said Cherring Dorje,DCP (Zone I).

“We will arrest the duo after we get the orders,since the Colaba police had recorded the FIR and obtained extradition of the duo from foreign countries. However,if the accused are not traceable,we will declare them absconders,” he said.

Grant said he would abide by the court’s directions and was waiting for instructions from his lawyer. “It’s not for us to decide our future course of action. We will do as the judiciary directs us to,” he said.

Grant’s lawyer,Taraq Sayed,said,“They have the option of a review,but I have advised them to surrender. We don’t see any point in filing a revision petition against the order now. We are waiting for the order copy to reach the Colaba police. Grant and Waters will surrender as soon as the warrant is issued.”

The two had appealed against a March 2006 conviction by the sessions court sentencing them to six years in prison on charges of sodomy and assault and were acquitted by the HC in 2008.

On Friday,while holding ex-British Navy man Duncan Grant,ex-lieutenant commander Allan Waters and their Indian associate William D’souza guilty of sexually abusing children at the Anchorage Shelter Home and indulging in unnatural offences,the Supreme Court based its findings on the same four witnesses whom the High Court had termed as “unreliable”.

Lauding the two victims,along with advocate Maharukh Adenwala,the SC accepted the witnesses’ testimony and claimed that “the trial court had correctly appreciated the evidence of the witnesses who testified”.

One of the major aspects that the SC considered,that was criticised by the HC in its judgment,was even if the victims took time before they could come forward,the delay did not mean that there was no sexual exploitation or abuse or that they were deterred or that they deposed falsely as per the design of some other person — something that the HC had reflected upon otherwise.

In disagreement with the HC’s order of thrashing Adenwala’s testimony,which the court had categorised as “hearsay”,the SC said her evidence could not be discarded,especially as it aimed at the welfare of the neglected kids. “We are unable to agree with the conclusion arrived at by the HC in rejecting her evidence in toto,” the Division Bench said.

The defence counsel had claimed that even if the duo were to be found guilty,it did not amount to unnatural offence. The court observed that the testimony of both the victims clearly spoke of sexual exploitation on various instances.

“The way in which the children at all the three places i.e. Colaba,Murud (Janjira) and Cuffe Parade were being used for sexual exploitation,it cannot be claimed that the ingredients of Section 377 have not been proved.” Again this aspect was not taken into consideration by the HC.