Police 'botched up' rape case, Court orders inquiry

 

NEW DELHI: Criticising the "shoddy and unintelligible" probe by Delhi Police in a rape case, a court here has ordered inquiry against the investigating officers to find out if the "botched up investigation was motivated or was due to complete lack of competence".

Additional Sessions Judge Nisha Saxena directed DCP (north east) to inquire the role of investigating officers in a rape case against the accused who were acquitted once and then retried in another criminal case without police having collected any concrete evidence.

"I feel the way and the manner in which investigation was conducted in the instant case in utter disregard of law, calls for enquiry into the actions of concerned police officials to ascertain if it was motivated or was due to complete lack of knowledge/competence," the court said.

The prosecution case originates from an FIR lodged in 2006 on the complaint of a woman that she was raped by three men - Vinod, Suresh and Brahmpal. She said that on the pretext of helping her financially, Vinod, a milk supplier, took her to a jungle in Usmanpur here on March 17, 2006 where he and the co-accused raped her.

However, in her statement recorded by the magistrate, she stated she had falsely accused the trio on the instigation of one Adesh for Rs 3,000 as they had implicated Adesh's brother in a criminal case.

She also said that in pursuance of their conspiracy, Adesh took her to the jungle where she was raped by two men so that her medical examination confirmed the sexual assault.

Based on this statement, the police filed a case against one Ram Kumar whose alias was mentioned as Adesh and his two accomplices Bijender and Nem Singh but could not explain where and when were they arrested.

During trial, the woman again took a somersault and denied all allegations against Adesh, Bijender and Singh leading to their acquittal.

Meanwhile, the police obtained permission for further probe in the matter and concluded that the woman and her husband had hatched a conspiracy with Ram Kumar, Bijender and Nem Singh to implicate Vinod, Brahmpal and Suresh.

A fresh case of rape, conspiracy and false evidence was registered against the woman, her husband and also Ram Kumar, Bijender and Nem Singh, which came up for trial by ASJ Saxena.

After securing bail from the court in the fresh case, the woman and her husband absconded and were declared proclaimed offender.

While acquitting Ram, Bijender and Nem Singh, the ASJ noted that IO of the original rape case ASI Anuradha Tyagi had no evidence if Adesh was also known by the name of Ram Kumar and even then chargesheeted him.

The court noted that even the IO of the second case, Inspector Krishan Lal could not collect any proof of enmity which he claimed led to Ram Kumar getting a false rape case registered against Vinod, Brahmpal and Suresh.

Directing DCP (north east) to inquire the role of IO Anuradha and Krishan Lal, the court said, "There are many loose ends in the prosecution story which go unexplained and the court is baffled and bewildered in the absence of any explanation.

"No effort has been made to establish that Adesh named in the statement of the prosecutrix to the magistrate is same as Ram Kumar," it said.

The ASJ said, "It is not clear whether the initial complaint was made by the victim under threat, pressure, coercion or whether her statement to the magistrate was recorded under influence or threat by actual offenders or by the probe agency in collusion with the actual offenders.

"The investigation in the matter is shoddy, slipshod and completely botched up and entire investigation seems to have been conducted in such a manner so as to benefit the persons against whom allegations were made in original complaint.

"The lodging of present FIR and the criminal trial of accused Nem Singh, Bijender and Ram Kumar alias Adesh who have faced trial since the year 2006 has resulted in double jeopardy and double whammy to them," it added. 

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/police-botched-up-rape-case-court-orders-inquiry/articleshow/19713471.cms

‘Take action against my wife’s family too. They paid me dowry’

  hardware engineer was jailed following a dowry harassment charge in Sept 2010. Using the complaint as evidence, he has now filed a police case against wife and in-laws, seeking that they be punished for the offence of paying dowry

Manjunathan Padmanabhan, a hardware engineer, spent three harrowing days in Parappana Agrahara, sharing cell space with thieves and murderers. His crime? Accepting dowry. Now, in perhaps a first-of-its-kind case, the 34-year- has turned the tables on his wife and her family by filing a counter complaint for giving him dowry.

 

The Dowry Prohibition (DP) Act states that both giving and accepting dowry is an offence punishable by law, and Section 3 of the Act speaks about the “penalty for giving or taking dowry”. But while cases of husbands and their family members spending time in jail for receiving dowry are dime a dozen, rarely — if ever — has a dowry giver been punished. 

 

In his complaint against his wife and in-laws, Padmanabhan, a resident of Ulsoor, has used the same statements made by his wife's relatives in their complaint against him three years ago. Ulsoor police registered an FIR on April 17.

 

In his complaint, Padmanabhan states that he was married to R Ashwini on September 2, 2009. His wife had filed a complaint against him on September 8, 2010 stating that she was harassed for dowry and that Padmanabhan was paid 119.75 grams of gold, 11 pieces of silverware and cash of Rs 25,000, Rs 1,000 and Rs 10,000 on January 2, 2010, July 5, 2010 and July 20, 2010 respectively. A case was filed against him under 498(A) of the IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 

 

In her complaint, Ashwini claimed that she and her family had also given Padmanabhan a suit in dowry. Her brother's statement claimed they had given cash on three occasions. The complaint was filed in the same police station (Ulsoor) and the complaint and the memo of evidence given by his in-laws are part of the station records. He claims he obtained all the necessary documents from the station through the Right to Information Act. 

 

Padmanabhan is now seeking action against all family members who admitted to giving him dowry. “Since offenders and abettors themselves admitted/claimed to have given dowry, it is submitted further that all these records and details are already with you,” Padmanabhan has stated in his complaint. 

 

Speaking to Bangalore Mirror, Padmanabhan said, “My father-in-law is a Central government employee. He knows giving dowry is a crime. He, along with his family, has admitted to giving me dowry. That is the crux of their complaint and police statements against me. They have admitted to committing a crime before a police officer and the police have to take action against those persons. I am only stating what the law says.”

 

When contacted for his reaction, Ashwini's father, A Ramesh Babu, the main accused in Padmanabhan’s complaint, said, “I have not paid any dowry to him. Only a complaint of harassment for dowry was filed. The police might have changed my statement and added that I paid dowry. I do not know about the complaint filed against me.”

 

AK Mohan Krishna, an advocate who specialises in matrimonial disputes and who is unconnected to this case, said, “This is the first time that the police have registered a FIR against the wife's family for giving dowry. If it is only a demand for dowry, then only the provision of IPC Section 498(A) comes into play. If the wife and her family members have admitted to giving dowry, then they have committed a crime under the Dowry Prohibition (DP) Act. If they have stated that they have given dowry, they are clearly pleading guilty here. Though this provision of punishing those who give dowry is in the Act, in reality it has never been invoked. The same Act is used to punish husbands and their families who receive dowry. Police usually do not take such complaints. But this case seems to be very promising for men who are accused of taking dowry.” 

 

Ulsoor police said, “He (Padmanabhan) was jailed on a case of dowry harassment and he has now filed a complaint against his wife and in-laws. We are investigating the case.”

 

http://www.bangaloremirror.com/article/1/201304212013042101174814079169f78/%E2%80%98Take-action-against-my-wife%E2%80%99s-family-too-They-paid-me-dowry%E2%80%99.html 

 

कॉन्स्टेबल के मर्डर में पत्नी-प्रेमी अरेस्ट

साहिबाबाद : दिल्ली के शकरपुर थाने में तैनात हेड कॉन्स्टेबल अजित बालियान हत्याकांड में फरार चल रहे आरोपी पत्नी राज बालियान और पड़ोसी मुकेश को पुलिस ने गिरफ्तार कर लिया है। साहिबाबाद थाना प्रभारी रामनाथ सिंह यादव ने इन दोनों की गिरफ्तारी की पुष्टि की। थाना प्रभारी ने बताया कि मृतक सिपाही की मां की तरफ से शिकायत दी गई थी कि उनकी बहु के अपने पड़ोसी मुकेश से अवैध रिश्ते थे। इसी बात का पता चलने पर उनके बेटे ने एतराज जताया था, जिसके बाद साजिश रचते हुए हत्या को अंजाम दिया गया।

मां की कोशिशों से हुआ केस
शकरपुर थाने में तैनात हेड कॉन्स्टेबल अजीत बालियान राजेंद्र नगर के सेक्टर-3 में पत्नी व दो बच्चों के साथ रह रह रहे थे। 10 अप्रैल की रात को 10 बजे के करीब अजीत ड्यूटी से घर लौटे। उसके बाद कमरे में सोने चले गए। उसके बाद पत्नी ने पुलिस को यह सूचना दी कि अजीत ने स्यूसाइड कर लिया है। लेकिन सबूत और पड़ोसियों के बयान हत्या की तरफ इशारा कर रहे थे। साहिबाबाद पुलिस ने भी इसे स्यूसाइड मान लिया था पर बाद मंे मृतक की मां ने सीनियर अफसरों से गुहार लगाई, तब जाकर पुलिस ने हत्या का केस दर्ज किया था। मुकेश दिल्ली के एक सरकारी स्कूल में टीचर है।

हत्या को स्यूसाइड बनाने की कोशिश [ जारी है ]

 http://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/delhi/crime/constable-murder-of-his-wife--boyfriend-arrested/articleshow/19715683.cms