The Supreme Court has issued understand to the state of Jammu and Kashmir at the writ petition filed on behalf of the Kathua gangrape and homicide sufferer’s father, praying for the switch of the trial lawsuits out of doors of the state.
The Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice D. Y. Chandrachud and Justice A. M. Khanwilkar has additionally ordered coverage to sufferer’s members of the family and Advocates Deepika Singh Rajawat and Talib Hussain.
At the graduation of the pressing listening to on Monday of the writ petition instituted via the organic father of the eight yr previous sufferer of the Kathua rape and homicide, Senior Counsel Indira Jaising, showing on behalf of the petitioner, pressed the prayer for the switch of the trial lawsuits out of doors of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to the UT of Chandigarh, Punjab-
“Our only concern is that the atmosphere in the state is highly polarised and hence, not conducive to a fair trial…Your Lordships have already dealt with the issue of the local lawyers obstructing the filing of the charge sheet by the crime branch and attempting to restrain Advocate Deepika Singh Rajawat from representing the victim’s family before the local Magistrate…the police has complained that they could not file the charge sheet for hours…there have been attacks on the advocate (Ms. Rajawat), who herself has five year old daughter…she was asked to give up the case…Advocate Talib Hussain, who belongs to the same community (as the victim’s family) and is assisting the prosecution, has also faced attacks…hence, we have prayed that the trial may be shifted to Chandigarh in view of its proximity and the consequent ease of commutation…”
“We have joined only the state of J & K as the respondent in the petition as the burden of prosecution lies on the state…we wish to clarify that There is no grievance as to the nature or manner of investigation…in fact, in my entire career, this is one of the best police investigations that I have seen…all the DNA reports are on record…the accused have been duly identified…one chargesheet has already been filed, with an indication therein that further investigation in respect of other conspirators is still underway…”, she clarified that best the trial and no longer the investigation isn’t sought to be transferred.
When an Advocate sought the permission of the courtroom to advance written submissions for the switch of the investigation to an impartial company, Ms. Jaising suggested vehemently, “this is not a PIL…this petition is on behalf of the father who alone is carrying the burden of his daughter’s death…when the police does a good job, it is our duty to say so loud and clear…attempts are being made to undo that investigation…there may be no transfer of the investigation to the CBI…since the investigation is still pending, considering the atmosphere prevailing in the state, the court may agree to monitor the probe…”
“Justice and the rule of law require that the investigation be transferred to an independent, central agency…please see a copy of the chargesheet (‘I have already annexed the same!’, exclaimed Ms. Jaising)…the intention of the state government is to create a rift [unclear]…”, complex the mentioned recommend. Another petitioner-in-person, having filed a PIL in the similar behalf, sought to advance, “two police officials took rupees 1.5 lakhs…”
Pleading that the bench would possibly not permit the previous recommend to recite his submissions, Ms. Jaising complex, “this petition has been filed by the direct biological father of the victim…we cannot venture into parentage of the 8 year old…there cannot be any victim blaming…”
“Primarily, the investigation has to be conducted by the local police…if there is evidence that the investigation is not proceeding correctly, only then may it be transferred to an independent agency…let us confine our focus to victim protection and fair trial”, noticed Chief Justice Misra.
Refuting the aforesaid petitioner-in-person’s claims in appreciate of victimology and reimbursement, the Chief Justice remarked, “there has been an instance *where in an offence under the POCSO Act, we have granted an excess compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs…”
Standing Counsel for the state of J & Ok, Mr. Shoaib Alam, submitted, “the chargesheet has been filed and the magistrate has taken cognizance…in respect of the plea for transfer of the trial, Your Lordships may grant time until April 28 which is the next date of the hearing (before the Judicial Magistrate, Kathua)…the victim’s family has already been accorded protection of five personnel…as for the local advocate representing them, though there has been no written complaint, the state shall give her the protection she wants…”
Ms. Jaising acceded that the prayer for switch of the trial is also regarded as after April 28.
The bench on Monday famous, “fair trial is inseparable to the right under Article 21…this case graphically requires protection of the victim and the lawyers who have the right to protect the interests of the victim in court…the interim protection to the victim’s family shall continue…protection shall also provided to the local lawyers (Ms. Rajawat and Mr. Hussain) and their family members…we do not wish to enter into the sphere of transfer of investigation…Mr. Shoaib Alam shall file the state’s reply on the plea for the transfer of the trial…”
At the request of Ms. Jaising, the bench added that the safety so supplies will likely be in undeniable garments. The bench additionally granted the prayer that the safety on the Juvenile Home the place the alleged Juvenile Accused is lodged at the present is reinforced, based on the spirit of the Juvenile Justice Act of 2015, and to make certain that no unauthorized user is authorized to fulfill him throughout his keep and in addition when he’s required within the Court for deposition.
The bench on Monday clarified that it shall no longer allow more than one suggest to intrude and argue and that best issues of safety, switch of trial and witness coverage will likely be handled, scheduling the subject for additional listening to on April 27.