CALLING IT an “excellent example of how insensitive police can be and have scant respect towards law of the land and Constitution,” the Bombay High Court recently pulled up the investigating officer (IO) of Mumbai Police, who submitted B-Summary (closure) report in a gang rape case. The court directed Mumbai Police Commissioner to appoint an IPS cadre officer to probe the crime along with investigation into the role played by the earlier IO and ascertain whether he helped the accused in getting “clean chit”. The HC said while the victim gave consent to quash the FIR, the same appeared to be done under pressure. The bench also observed that “it is invariably coming across such cases wherein police in rape crimes are filing final reports for offence of cheating, without understanding gravamen of allegations in FIR by sexual assault victim”. “They are also oblivious about the law including law laid down by the Supreme Court through its judgements. Article 21 of the constitution also provides ‘right to life’ to a victim and not only the accused in a crime,” the bench added. The HC asked its registry to forward its order to Maharashtra State Commission for Women (MSCW) and Director General of Police (DGP) so that appropriate legal remedial measures can be adopted by them. A division bench of Justice Ajey S Gadkari and Justice Shivkumar G Dige last month passed an order in criminal application by four accused booked in December, 2021 for offences punishable under section 376D (punishment for gangrape), 385 (Putting person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion) seeking quashing of the FIR by Mumbai Police. The order copy was made available this month. The respondent victim had in April, this year filed an affidavit and given her consent for quashing the crime in question. The bench said the FIR “clearly” made out a case under section 376-D of IPC against the three petitioners. The victim had stated that until October, 2021 the accused had her nude and intimate photographs with them and had threatened her and demanded Rs. 10 lakh for not circulating the same. Before the victim was to get married with another man, one of the accused showed her photographs to the prospective groom and the marriage was broken.
