Crime – Supreme Court Questions Police Probe in Ghaziabad Child Murder Case
Crime – The Supreme Court has raised serious concerns over the manner in which the Ghaziabad police handled the rape and murder case of a four-year-old girl, calling the investigation deeply insensitive. The court has now directed senior police officials, including the city’s police commissioner, to appear before it on April 13 along with complete case records for further scrutiny.
Court Flags Gaps in Initial Investigation
During the hearing on Friday, a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, expressed dissatisfaction with the early stages of the investigation. The judges pointed out that the police had failed to promptly include charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, as well as rape charges, which are critical in such cases.
The bench noted that such omissions could significantly impact the direction and seriousness of the investigation. It observed that the initial response by law enforcement did not reflect the gravity of the crime.
Questions Raised Over Encounter Narrative
The court also examined the police’s version of events surrounding an alleged encounter involving the accused. Judges indicated that the explanation provided lacked clarity and raised doubts about the transparency of the investigation process.
These concerns have prompted the court to consider whether the case should be transferred to a Special Investigation Team (SIT) operating under judicial supervision. Such a move, if ordered, would aim to ensure a more independent and thorough probe.
Hospitals and Police Under Scrutiny
Apart from the police, the role of two private hospitals involved in the case has also come under criticism. The bench observed what it described as a “complete lack of sensitivity” in the handling of the victim, both by medical institutions and law enforcement authorities.
As a result, notices have been issued to multiple parties, including the state government, the concerned station house officer, the private hospitals, and the executive magistrate. The court has asked them to respond to the issues raised during the proceedings.
Directions to Protect Victim’s Identity
The Supreme Court has issued clear instructions to ensure the privacy and dignity of the victim and her family. Authorities have been directed to strictly protect their identity and ensure that no form of harassment or undue pressure is placed on them.
The court also took into account submissions made by senior advocate N Hariharan, who appeared on behalf of the victim’s father. His arguments highlighted procedural lapses and raised concerns about the overall conduct of the investigation.
Senior Officials Summoned for Accountability
In a significant step, the court has summoned top-ranking police officials to appear in person with all relevant documents. This move signals the judiciary’s intent to closely monitor developments and hold those responsible accountable for any lapses.
The upcoming hearing on April 13 is expected to play a crucial role in determining whether the investigation will be transferred to an SIT or continue under existing authorities with stricter oversight.
Separate Development in Corruption Case
In another matter heard the same day, the Supreme Court declined to grant relief to suspended Punjab Police DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar. Bhullar, who was arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation in October last year, had approached the court seeking bail in connection with a corruption case.
The court refused to entertain his plea, indicating that it was not inclined to intervene at this stage. The case will now proceed as per the existing legal process.
Broader Concerns Over Justice Delivery
The observations made by the Supreme Court in the Ghaziabad case underline broader concerns about how sensitive criminal cases are handled at the ground level. The emphasis on accountability, procedural correctness, and victim protection reflects the judiciary’s continued focus on ensuring fairness and transparency in the justice system.
As the case progresses, the court’s involvement is likely to remain significant, particularly if it decides to place the investigation under direct supervision.