The Central Bureau of Investigation on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court seeking modification of an order staying its ongoing probe in the sensational Bulandsahar gang rape case, saying it may cause ‘disappearance of material evidences’ besides enabling six accused to seek statutory bail.
The apex court had on August 29 taken note of the controversial remarks of Uttar Pradesh Minister Azam Khan that the gang rape case was a ‘political conspiracy’, while staying the CBI probe in the case. It had also asked whether the state should stop people holding high offices from making such comments on heinous crimes.
In a plea filed by CBI Superintendent of Police Abhishek Dular, the probe agency sought its impleadment as a party to the petition filed by the husband and father of the rape survivors, a mother-daughter duo.
‘That it is respectfully reiterated that running period of 90 days permitted under 167 of CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) for completion of investigation, would not get stopped and would also cause prejudice to the investigation and after the expiry of 90 days would extend to these suspects, a right to claim release,’ the plea said.
‘That on behalf of the CBI, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that continuation of stay of investigation by the CBI may result in disappearance of material evidence and may cause prejudice to the conduct of this case,’ it said.
While seeking modification of the order passed by a bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and C Nagappan, the probe agency sought permission to continue its probe in the case.
The first information report initially was lodged by the Uttar Pradesh police under various provisions on July 30. The CBI had re-registered the offence on August 18 in pursuance of the Allahabad high court order.
The brutal incident had happened on the night of July 29 when a group of highway robbers stopped the car of a Noida-based family and sexually assaulted the woman and her daughter after dragging them out of the vehicle at gun-point.
The apex court had also appointed jurist and senior lawyer F S Nariman as amicus curiae, as it framed some legal questions with regard to freedom of speech and expression and probable impact of statements of those holding high offices on free and fair probe in heinous cases like this.
The court had also noted the apprehensions of the victim family, represented by lawyer Kislay Pandey, that there was no possibility of a ‘fair investigation’ in Uttar Pradesh in view of the fact that a minister has allegedly made a public statement that it was a ‘political conspiracy’.
Framing the questions for its adjudication, the bench said ‘when a victim files an FIR alleging rape/gang rape/murder or such other heinous offences against a person or a group of persons, whether any individual, holding a high office or who is in authority, should make a comment on the crime that it was an outcome of political conspiracy, moreover when he has nothing to do with the offence’.
It said whether the state, which is ‘the protector of citizens’, should allow these comments which can have an effect or ‘may create distrust’ with regard to fair investigation in such cases.
The court, while framing another question, said it would examine whether such statements are covered under the freedom of speech and expression of an individual. It said the statements, which are not given for self protection, comply with the concept of ‘constitutional sensitivities’.
The man, whose wife and daughter were gang-raped last month on a highway in Bulandshahr, had on August 13 moved the apex court seeking transfer of the case to Delhi, besides lodging of an FIR against Khan as well as several policemen.
The Allahabad high court had ordered a CBI probe into the incident besides deciding to monitor the investigation.
In the plea filed in the apex court, the victim’s father sought an order for transferring the trial of the case to Delhi ‘in the interest of justice’.
Unhappy with the UP police, the petitioner said the probe should be conducted by ‘some other competent agency’.
