Probe

ED Moves HC Against Order Allowing Presence of Lawyer During Satyendar Jain’s Interrogation

The AAP minister was arrested on May 30 under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday, June 2, approached the Delhi high court challenging a trial court’s order allowing presence of a lawyer during the interrogation of Delhi health minister Satyendar Jain, arrested in a money laundering case.

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Sachin Datta allowed the request of the ED’s counsel for an urgent listing of its plea and fixed the matter for hearing on Friday.

Jain, an Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader, was arrested on May 30 under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the trial court on May 31, remanded him to the ED’s custody till June 9.

While remanding Jain to the ED’s custody, the trial court had allowed his plea that during the time of enquiry/ investigation of the accused, one advocate of the accused shall be allowed to remain present at a safe distance where from he can see the accused, but not hear him.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the ED, had vehemently opposed this in the trial court.

The ED has challenged the condition before the high court and submitted that the agency had filed a petition in this regard and urgent listing be allowed.

The trial court had remanded Jain to ED’s custody till June 9, saying that his interrogation was required to unearth an alleged larger conspiracy.

The Solicitor General had argued before the trial court that there was a chequered layer of money and the agency was trying to find out if the accused was laundering somebody else’s money and whether there were other potential beneficiaries.

“The money has not stopped at Rs 4.81 crore. It is beyond. Some facts we don’t have, but the accused is aware,” the law officer had said, adding that the likelihood of tampering with evidence could not be ruled out till the agency ascertained the real trail.

So far, Jain has been evasive in his replies to the agency, SG Mehta had alleged.

The ED had said that Jain’s custody was required to find out where, eventually, the money came from.

“This is not a one-time offence. This is of a recurring nature which may still be going on. He (Jain) may be able to throw light during custodial interrogation,” it had said.

Also Read: ED Summons Sonia Gandhi, Rahul in ‘National Herald’ Money Laundering Case

Jain’s counsel had opposed the ED application, saying the case dated back to 2015 and that the entire allegation was the reproduction from that charge sheet. The counsel also said that the accused had already been summoned five or six times for interrogation by the agency.

He had said there was no requirement for custodial interrogation in the case.

The agency had earlier provisionally attached assets worth Rs 4.81 crore of Jain’s family and companies “beneficially owned and controlled” by him as part of a money laundering probe against him.

(PTI)

There’s Billions Stashed Abroad But the ED is Not Willing to Open the Pandora Box

Can a special investigative team or a bureaucratic multi-agency group bring back a single dollar?

Nothing has fazed the country’s wealthiest it appears. The latest set of global leaks indicates that the rich and mighty continue to shift their assets into safe tax havens abroad.

This, of course, begs the question: what has happened in terms of regulatory or government action?

Instead of making any effort to bring back funds by triggering Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA), the Centre seems intent on appointing committees and groups to monitor the investigation. On May 27, 2014, the Centre constituted a high powered SIT comprising two judges of SC, Secretary Revenue, RBI Deputy Governor, IB Chief, RAW Chief, CBI, ED and CBDT. The SIT, formed to unearth black money, is still functional.

And on October 4, 2021, after the latest Pandora Papers exposure, the Centre set up a Multi Agency Group (MAG), comprising Chairman CBDT, ED, RBI and FIU. SIT was bypassed. Former SC judges, Secretary Revenue, RAW Chief, IB Chief and CBI (all parts of SIT) were dropped from MAG. Can SIT or MAG bring back a single dollar? No, is the emphatic answer! They can only collect information and submit reports, but cannot supplant statutory powers of ED under FEMA.

RBI administers FEMA through delegated legislation. And the Enforcement Directorate (ED) enforces the Act. However, the ED has remained inert and has not acted under FEMA to adjudicate on stashed funds.

Stashed funds can be brought back and confiscated only by ED under FEMA, but the agency has so far not triggered FEMA at all. Hundreds of names have been floating in the public domain since the leaks of Liechtenstein (2008), Luxembourg (2014), Panama (2016), Paradise (2017) and now Pandora (2021), but ED’s inaction is inexplicable.

The agency prefers to administer the Prevention of Money Laundering (PML) Act, 2002 rather than FEMA, 1999.

One reason could be the delaying and harassing tactics of arrest jurisprudence. ED cannot arrest under FEMA. To inquire and adjudicate under FEMA for stashed funds abroad, it is required to act meticulously after weighing evidence. It cannot keep the adjudication hanging.

PMLA, on the other hand, empowers ED to arrest and keep the investigation hanging. ED only has to argue that matter has international ramifications and investigation is at a crucial stage. ‘National security is involved’. These three pet sentences are parroted and that starts remand jurisprudence! After PMLA was notified on 1.7.2005, the entire focus of ED shifted to this new law. ED’s failure to set FEMA into motion in the teeth of hundreds of names appearing in the public domain is shocking. Centre is thus clearly not interested in bringing back stashed funds. This is the inevitable conclusion one is constrained to draw.

Centre has also failed to grasp the distinction between exchange control issue and tax issue, arising out of stashed funds. Exchange control issue under FEMA has been blacked out so far. It is unlikely that this issue will be pursued with prominent names appearing.

To be fair to all the foreign asset holders, they must be given the opportunity to clear their names. ED must issue notices to them and close those cases where reply is found satisfactory. Presently only press statements are being issued in panic. In some categories of cases even RBI can issue notices to them and clear their names under FEMA, if so warranted. If the reply is not found satisfactory, then all may be subjected to the majesty of law. This becomes imperative since all stashed assets cannot be illegal. ED must separate wheat from chaff.

Irrespective of violation of FEMA, if funds or assets held abroad have not been disclosed, then The Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 comes into play. Therefore, it is not a case of setting in motion either FEMA, 1999 or Black Money Act, 2015. Both have to be set in motion. It is the obligation of statutory authorities to trigger law into motion when facts come in public domain. However, both these legislations are oppressive, draconian and unimplementable.

The problem is that whenever something sensational surfaces, draconian legislations are enacted with knee jerk-reaction. Enactment of Black Money Act, 2015 was entirely uncalled for. It’s a draconian law without any efficacy. Penalty of three times the tax computed is required to be paid in addition to tax. Under FEMA, similarly, ED can slap a penalty up to three times the sum involved in contravention, in addition to repatriation and confiscation. Can such thoughtless draconian laws ever be enforced? FEMA is enough to deal with stashed funds; and Income Tax Act, 1961 is enough for taxing undisclosed income.

On October, 4 2021, while constituting the new MAG, Centre announced that under the Black Money Act, 2015, as on 15.09.2021 Rs.20,352 crores have been detected in Panama and Paradise investigations. Mark the word “detection”. How many dollars have been repatriated, let alone confiscated? Zero.

Bishwajit Bhattacharyya is a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court and Ex-Additional Solicitor General of India.

‘Will Welcome Corruption Allegation Probe if CM Orders’: Maharashtra Home Minister

Former Mumbai Police commissioner Param Bir Singh had alleged that home minister Anil Deshmukh wanted police officers to collect Rs 100 crore monthly from bars and hotels.

Mumbai: Maharashtra home minister Anil Deshmukh on Thursday said he would welcome a probe if chief minister Uddhav Thackeray orders any into former Mumbai Police commissioner Param Bir Singh’s allegation of corruption against him [Deshmukh].

Deshmukh made the comment in a midnight tweet and also shared the copy of his March 21, 2021 letter to Thackeray, in which he had sought immediate probe into Singh’s allegation. “I had demanded the honourable chief minister to order probe into Param Bir Singh’s allegation against me to clear the air. I will welcome if the honourable chief minister orders probe,” Deshmukh tweeted, adding “Satyamev Jayate” [truth shall prevail].

In his letter, Deshmukh had said that there is “no truth” in the allegations levelled against him and demanded investigation into the matter.

Also read: SC Says Param Bir Singh’s Allegations ‘Quite Serious’, Tells Him to Approach Bombay HC

In Singh’s eight-page letter to Thackeray, he had on March 20, 2021 created a flutter in Maharashtra’s political circles, claiming that Deshmukh wanted police officers to collect Rs 100 crore monthly from bars and hotels.

On the same day, Deshmukh trashed the allegations Singh made against him.

Under fire over the handling of the bomb scare outside industrialist Mukesh Ambani’s house in Mumbai, the state government had on March 17, 2021 transferred Param Bir Singh from the post of city police commissioner to the low-key home guard department.

A day after that, Deshmukh had said Singh was transferred after some of the latter’s colleagues committed “serious and unforgivable mistakes”.

Delhi Police’s Special Cell Visits Blast Site Near Israeli Embassy

An investigation team visited the blast site to collect evidence for its ongoing probe.

New Delhi: An investigation team of Delhi Police’s Special Cell on Saturday visited the blast site near the Israeli Embassy to collect more evidence as part of its ongoing probe, sources said.

They said the forensic experts have also collected some samples from the crime scene that will ascertain the chemical composition used in the low-intensity improvised explosive device.

A team from the National Bomb Data Centre (NBDC) of the NSG visited the spot for post-blast analysis, a senior officer said, adding that the findings will be shared with the Delhi Police team investigating the case.

Official sources said ball bearings seized from the spot were found scattered on the ground, and the impact of the explosion was felt within a radius of 20-25 metres.

Also read: Low Intensity Blast Near Delhi’s Israeli Embassy, Jaishankar Assures Tel Aviv of Protection

The minor blast took place on Friday evening in a high-security zone of the national capital. No one was injured.

An envelope addressed to the Israeli Embassy containing a note was found at the site of the blast, sources said. A case has been registered and the Delhi Police’s Special Cell is investigating the matter.

A ten-member team from the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) visited the blast site on Friday and collected residues which include a metallic swab and ball bearings.

Delhi Police commissioner S.N. Shrivastava too had visited the site in the evening and taken stock of the situation.

All materials seized from the spot have been handed over to the investigating officer of Delhi Police, a source said.

“We are yet to receive the samples collected from the spot. Once the investigating officer submits the samples conclusively, we will be sending them to our explosives team. Only a chemical test will help us identify the exact composition of the samples,” FSL sources said.

The blast took place when President Ram Nath Kovind, Vice President M. Venkaiah Naidu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi were present a few kilometres away at the Beating Retreat ceremony at the culmination of the Republic Day celebrations.

Investigators have scanned footage retrieved from CCTV cameras installed nearby and spotted a vehicle moving suspiciously near the embassy just before the explosion, sources said.

The explosion took place on the day India and Israel marked the 29th anniversary of establishment of their diplomatic relations.

‘Let Allahabad High Court Deal With Hathras Case,’ Says Supreme Court

When other lawyers expressed the wish to argue, the apex court said: “We don’t need the assistance of the whole world”.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Thursday said the Allahabad high court should be allowed to monitor the Hathras case in which a 19-year-old Dalit woman was brutally gang raped by her own admission and died of serious injuries.

The top court, which was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and several intervention pleas filed by activists and lawyers, was told that no fair trial was possible in Uttar Pradesh as the investigation has been botched up considerably.

A bench headed by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, said, “Let the high court deal with it. We are here if there is any problem.”

Besides Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the hearing saw a battery of senior advocates like Harish Salve, Indira Jaising and Siddharth Luthra appearing for various parties.

When other lawyers expressed the wish to argue, the apex court said: “We don’t need the assistance of the whole world”.

The hearing also witnessed deliberations on the victim’s identity, on the fact that it should not be disclosed and that her family members and witnesses be given full protection.

The lawyer appearing for the victim’s family demanded that the proceedings of the case be shifted out of Uttar Pradesh to a court in the national capital.

The apprehension of not getting a fair trial in the state was also raised by Indira Jaising who also made submissions on witness protection.

Tushar Mehta referred to a recent affidavit filed by the Uttar Pradesh government which sought to offer details on the purported security provided to the victim’s family and witnesses in the case.

Referring to the compliance affidavit, Mehta said the victim’s family had informed that they had engaged a lawyer. While Mehta said that the victim’s family had also requested that the government advocate pursue the case on their behalf, it is also a fact that the family had filed a petition with the Allahabad high court, noting that the local administration was not allowing them to venture out of the house or meet people.

Also read: Are You Aware of Amended Definition of Rape, HC Asks UP Cop Who Denied Hathras Victim Was Raped

Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for DGP of Uttar Pradesh, said that a request has been made before the bench that CRPF should be deployed for security of witnesses.

“Whoever your lordships feel, can give protection,” Salve said, adding that it should not be construed to be any reflection on the state police.

Mehta said, “The state is completely non-partisan”.

During the hearing before the bench, also comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, advocate Seema Kushwaha, appearing for the victim’s family, said they want that after investigation, the trial be held in a court in Delhi.

She said that CBI should be asked to submit the status report of investigation directly in the apex court.

Mehta said factual position is that the state government had already said it has no objection and anybody can conduct the probe and CBI has taken over the investigation on October 10, 2020.

The law officer said that the victim’s identity should not be revealed in any manner as it is not permissible under the law.

Senior advocate Indira Jaising, representing one of the intervenors, said the accused should not be heard at this stage.

She added, “We don’t expect a fair trial in the state of UP. The investigation has been botched up”.

“We want intensive monitoring of the case by a Constitutional court,” Jaising said, adding that a special public prosecutor should be appointed by the apex court in the case.

Also read: Hathras Case: ‘3-Fold Security Mechanism’ for Protection of Victim’s Family, UP Govt Tells SC

“We are not satisfied with the protection given to the victim’s family and witnesses by Uttar Pradesh. Let protection be given by CRPF as was done in Unnao case,” she said, adding, “It is the very government against whom the victim’s family have grievances”.

Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, who appeared for one the accused, said that details of the case are all over in the media.

“You go to the jurisdictional high court,” the bench told Luthra.

The Solicitor General opposed one of the applications filed by an organisation which has sought to transfer the investigation in the Hathras incident to the CBI.

“The Supreme Court should direct that nobody should collect money in the name of the victim. We have seen this in the past. I oppose this IA,” Mehta said.

One of the intervenors argued that probe into the case should be conducted by a court-monitored special investigating team.

CBI Takes Charge of Hathras Case, Visits Crime Scene With Brother

Large numbers of police personnel had been deployed in and around the village ahead of the CBI team’s visit.

New Delhi: At around noon on Tuesday, October 13, a team of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) personnel reached the house of the 19-year-old Dalit victim of the Hathras brutality and collected samples from the spot where the victim was allegedly cremated by Uttar Pradesh police without the consent or involvement of her family members.

In the afternoon, the victim’s brother, Satyendra, was taken by CBI officials to sign some papers. While family members were initially apprehensive about where and why he was being taken, another relative confirmed to The Wire at night that he had returned and assured everyone there was no need to worry.

On Tuesday, the CBI team also visited the spot in Hathras where the alleged crime had taken place, with the victim’s brother. It directed the local police to cordon off the scene of crime.

Large numbers of police personnel had been deployed in and around the village ahead of the CBI team’s visit.

Also read: ‘Illegally Confined to House by Hathras Admin,’ Victim’s Family Moves Allahabad HC

The teenaged victim had died on September 29 in Delhi’s Safdarjung hospital after having been allegedly gang-raped by four upper caste Thakur men in Uttar Pradesh’s Hathras.

After a nationwide uproar, the Adityanath government said the probe would be handed over to the CBI. However, it had been 12 days after the victim’s death when the CBI finally took over the case on Sunday.

Leaders from Congress, Aam Aadmi Party, Trinamool Congress and other opposition leaders of the state from Samajwadi Party and Rashtriya Lok Dal had staged pitched protests calling out the apathy of the state in the case.

A notification was issued by the Centre on the request of the state government for the CBI to probe the rape, eventual death of the victim and atrocity, including “any attempt, abetment and/or conspiracy, in relation to or in connection with such offence(s) and/or for any other offence committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts”.

Also read: Hathras Case: CBI Takes Over Case, Registers FIR

A team was constituted to pursue leads on the case, which was initially registered at the Chandpa Police station in Hathras. The complainant, the victim’s brother, Satyendra, had initially alleged that the main accused, Sandeep, had tried to strangulate his sister in a millet field where she was working with her mother on September 14.

“The complainant had alleged that on September 14, 2020, the accused tried to strangulate his sister in the millet field. The case has been registered by CBI on the request of Uttar Pradesh government and further notification from government of India,” CBI spokesperson R.K. Gaur had said after the registration of the FIR on Sunday.

In a statement on September 22, the victim herself had alleged that she was gang raped by four upper caste men from the same village, namely Sandeep, Ramu, Lavkush and Ravi.

Note: The story has been updated to include information conveyed to The Wire by a relative that the victim’s brother had returned home after the CBI had taken him to an office and that he had himself not been questioned, as had earlier been apprehended.

‘Why Not Have Statutory Body to Regulate TV News?’: Bombay HC Asks Centre

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh, who appeared for the Union government, told the court that news channels “did not have an open hand as such.”

Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Monday asked the Union government why there should not be a statutory body to regulate the content broadcast through television news channels, a poser coming in the backdrop of frenzied media coverage of actor Sushant Singh Rajput’s death.

The court sought to know why the electronic media should have an “open hand” over its coverage.

“Is there a statutory mechanism for (TV news) broadcasters?” the HC asked.

“Just as how the Press Council of India exists for the print media, why don’t you (Union government) think of a similar council for the electronic media? Why should they have an open hand?” said a bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice G.S. Kulkarni.

The bench was hearing a bunch of public interest litigations (PILs) seeking that the press, particularly TV news channels, be directed to exercise restrain in their reportage on the death of Rajput (34) and the related probe by multiple agencies.

The pleas, filed by several retired senior police officers, activists and private citizens, claim that the press has been conducting a “media trial” into the case, ascribing roles and presuming the guilt of the accused persons, thus hampering a fair probe and trial into the matter.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh, who appeared for the Union government, told the court that news channels “did not have an open hand as such.”

“It is not as if the government is not doing anything.

It does take action on complaints received (against channels),” Singh said.

“But ultimately, the government cannot control everything. The press has the freedom and its rights,” he said.

Also read: 34 Bollywood Producers Move HC Against Irresponsible Remarks by Republic TV, Times Now

The bench, however, pointed out that the government’s own affidavit, filed previously in the court, showed that on numerous occasions, it had forwarded the complaints it received, to private bodies such as the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) and News Broadcasters Federation (NBF).

Earlier in the day, senior advocate Devadatt Kamat, who appeared for the NBA, had told the court that the government should be responsible in matters concerning media reportage, rather than outsourcing the responsibility to private bodies.

Kamat said that there existed statutory provisions and rules under the Cable TV Act and it was the Centre’s responsibility to enforce these provisions.

Instead, the ministry of information and broadcasting often forwarded the complaints it receives to the NBA and NBF, he said.

Kamat showed instances of complaints against news coverage in the Sushant case having been “forwarded” by the government to the NBA.

In the past, one TV news channel had refused to abide by the NBA’s recommendations in another case, saying it was not part of the association, Kamat said.

“The question is whether this outsourcing is permissible or whether the authorities have to be responsible to enforce what the statute provides,” Kamat said.

“When a government has a regime in place, where is the question of GOI (Government of India) abdicating its duties and asking these private, self-righteous associations (to look into complaints)?” he said.

Kamat argued that a media trial violated an accused’s right to life and personal liberty as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India and that it amounted to an interference in the administration of justice.

He urged the court to look at the “allied issue” of the “leakage of information by investigating agencies” while their probes are going on.

The HC will continue hearing the arguments in the case on Wednesday.

Hathras Case: CBI Takes Over Case, Registers FIR

The case has been registered by CBI on the request of Uttar Pradesh Government and further Notification from Government of India.

New Delhi: The CBI registered an FIR early Sunday morning and took over the investigation into the alleged gangrape and murder of a Dalit woman last month in Hathras district of Uttar Pradesh, officials said.

The central probe agency registered the FIR under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections related to gangrape and murder among others, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

It assigned the case to its Ghaziabad unit with a special team to investigate the ghastly crime, they said.

The 19-year old woman was allegedly raped by four men on September 14, 2020. She succumbed to severe assault injuries at Safdarjung hospital a fortnight later which was followed by a hushed up cremation at night allegedly forced by the district administration.

The brutal injuries suffered by the woman and the administration’s move to cremate her body late at night triggered massive outrage among people resulting in a pitched political battle from Delhi to Hathras, a city known for its satire and asafoetida.

The political slugfest was further perpetuated after the state police’s statement that it had not found any evidence of rape.

Faced with public anger and the opposition’s protests over the Dalit teenager’s alleged rape and murder by upper-caste Thakur men, the state government had finally decided to hand over the case to the CBI which was referred to the probe agency by a central government notification on Saturday.

Also read: Hathras: Woman Falsely Branded ‘#NaxalBhabhi’ Is a Medical Professional From Jabalpur

The officer concerned of the Uttar Pradesh police had registered a case of attempt to murder on a statement by the victim’s brother who, as per the FIR at Chandpa police station, had said the accused had tried to strangulate his sister in a millet field and escaped when she raised an alarm.

The notification issued by the centre on the request of the state government had asked the CBI to probe rape, murder and atrocity and “any attempt, abetment and/or conspiracy, about or in connection with such offence(s) and/or for any other offence committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts”.

“The complainant had alleged that on September 14, 2020, the accused tried to strangulate his sister in the millet field. The case has been registered by CBI on the request of Uttar Pradesh Government and further Notification from Government of India,” CBI spokesperson R.K. Gaur said.

FIR taken down from CBI’s website, reuploaded

According to The Hindu, the CBI on Sunday took down the copy of the FIR that was uploaded to its website and re-uploaded it a while later.

The first FIR said the CBI’s Ghaziabad unit mentioned “rape, attempt to murder, gang rape and murder (other)” as suspected offences in the case. But later, the FIR was removed and the link in the press release lead to a bank fraud case.

“Late in the afternoon, a fresh release was posted, stating that the agency had registered a case ‘against an accused and taken over the investigation of the case, earlier registered vide CC no-136/2020 at Police Station Chandpa, District-Hathras (Uttar Pradesh) on a complaint'”, according to The Hindu.

Meanwhile, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi sharpened his attack on the Yogi Adityanath dispensation over the alleged rape and murder of the Dalit woman.

In a tweet, he said, “The CM & his police say no one was raped because for them, and many other Indians, she was NO ONE”.

The former Congress chief also said the “shameful truth” was that many Indians do not consider Dalits, Muslims and tribals to be human.

He also tagged a media report which asked why police were denying rape when the woman had repeatedly reported that she was raped.

(With PTI inputs)

‘Hathras Exists in Jharkhand as Well,’ Says HC Over Shoddy Probe into Rape-Murder

Justice Ananda Sen, while hearing a writ petition filed by the victim’s father, said while the girl had suffered seriously before death, the investigation in the case was carried out in a “casual” manner.

Ranchi: The Jharkhand high court has pulled up the state police for its “lacklustre and shoddy investigation” into the alleged rape and murder of a 15-year- old girl earlier in the year, and said Hathras-like places not just exist in Uttar Pradesh but in this state as well.

The court also directed DGP M.V. Rao to constitute a special investigation team to look into the case.

According to an FIR filed on March 30, 2020, the accused had poured kerosene oil on the girl, a resident of Giridih, and set her on fire. Her father said that the family had caught hold of the accused when he was trying to escape, but his relatives came to his rescue.

Justice Ananda Sen, while hearing a writ petition filed by the father on Thursday, said the post-mortem report has suggested that the girl sustained 100 per cent burns, her body was charred, but the investigation in the case was carried out in a “casual” manner.

He also said that the shocking incident has prompted the court to say that “Hathras (like places) is not only in the State of Uttar Pradesh but also is in the State of Jharkhand.”

“Surprisingly, rather shockingly the swab of the victim was sent to the laboratory only on May 20, 2020. In the entire case diary there is no explanation about the delay caused,” Justice Sen observed.

Also read: ‘Illegally Confined to House by Hathras Admin,’ Victim’s Family Moves Allahabad HC

The court cannot keep its eyes shut and ignore this type of “lacklustre and shoddy” probe, he said.

“This heinous incident needs immediate investigation to bring to light the correct fact and to book the accused.

The way this investigation proceeded is absolutely unsatisfactory.

“I think this is a fit case where a special investigation team (SIT) be constituted. I, therefore, direct the Director-General of Police, Jharkhand, to immediately constitute an SIT to investigate the case,” Justice Sen added.

A 19-year-old Dalit woman was gang-raped in Hathras district, Uttar Pradesh, allegedly by four upper-caste men.

After fighting for her life for two weeks, she died in a Delhi hospital. The woman’s family alleged that her body was “forcefully” cremated at an ungodly hour by the police.

The incident sent shockwaves across India, and protests seeking justice were staged in several states.

UP Govt Extends Deadline for SIT Probing Hathras Case

The special investigation team, constituted on September 30, and led by Home Secretary Bhagwan Swarup will have 10 more days to file its report.

Lucknow: The UP government has given an additional ten days to the three-member SIT investigating the alleged gang rape and killing of a 19-year-old Dalit woman in Hathras as the “probe is not complete”, a senior official said Wednesday.

The special investigation team, constituted on September 30, 2020, and led by Home Secretary Bhagwan Swarup, was initially given seven days to submit its report.

But the UP government later sought a CBI probe into the case and the criminal conspiracy to spread caste conflict it has suspected. On Tuesday, it told the Supreme Court it wanted an apex court-monitored CBI inquiry into the incident to ensure “no vested interests will be able to create a fake, false narrative with oblique motives”.

“Yes…the time for submitting the report for the SIT has been extended by ten days,” Additional Chief Secretary (Home) Awanish Kumar Awasthi told PTI.

Asked about the reasons for the extension, he added, “The reason is one. The probe is not complete.”

Also read: Website in ‘Foreign Plot to Cause UP Riots’ Says ‘Avoid NYPD, White Supremacists’

The Yogi Adityanath government is facing severe criticism for its handling of the case, particularly after the local police cremated the woman’s body at night without the family’s approval. However, officials said the cremation was done “as per the wishes of the family”.

The government has claimed that some people were trying to foment caste tensions in the aftermath of the alleged gang rape of the woman by four ‘upper caste’ Thakur men on September 14, 2020. Quoting an FSL report, it has also sought to deny the rape charge in spite of oral evidence recorded in the form of a video statement by the victim.

Referring to recent incidents, Chief Minister Adityanath has said that “anarchist elements were trying to trigger communal and caste violence in the state.”

The woman died on September 29, 2020, of the grievous injuries she suffered during the assault.