'No role of prosecution behind rape victim's backtracking'
During investigation in the case where a rape victim was arrested for turning hostile after taking money from the accused, so far it has come to light that there was no role of prosecution. Sources in the police department said the rape victim and her accomplices took the money on their own.Updated: Jan 15, 2014 12:16 IST
During investigation in the case where a rape victim was arrested for turning hostile after taking money from the accused, so far it has come to light that there was no role of prosecution.
Sources in the police department said the rape victim and her accomplices took the money on their own and the sections of Prevention of Corruption Act in the FIR would soon be dropped.
Earlier, the Prevention of Corruption Act was used the complaint mentioned that the accused took money on the pretext that they needed to pay the prosecution, but after investigations his (prosecution) role has been ruled out.
Meanwhile, the woman who was pursuing the rape case and her two associates Ashok and Gulzaar, who were arrested on Monday, were sent to judicial custody on Tuesday. The money was recovered from the woman. The police did not press for their police custody.
Kalka-resident Sarita, an accused in the rape case, had approached Panchkula deputy commissioner of police Ashwin Shenvi and said the complainant, the rape victim, had been demanding Rs 4 lakh to turn hostile.
Shenvi formed a team under assistant commissioner of police (ACP) Dharambir Singh and a trap was laid on Monday. The deal was agreed for Rs 2.3 lakh. The woman came along with her two associates.
She was paid a substantial part of the money before her statement and was promised that she would be paid rest of the amount later.
One of her associates Ashok had gone along with her in the court, while Gulzaar kept standing outside.
When she came back after turning hostile, she was paid the money.
The police then arrested her along with her associates. The cash, treated with phenolphthalein powder, was recovered from them.
A case under sections 213 (accepting gratification for screening the offender from punishment), 214 (offering gift or restoration of property in consideration of screening offender) and 384 (for extortion) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered.
First Published: Jan 15, 2014 12:06 IST