WITH THE high court asking the State Women’s Commission’s to explain as to what made it to keep the Ashiana rape case victim confined to a women protection home for more one year causing untold misery to the victim, the role of the SWC has once again come under the scanner.
The role of the SWC in fact appeared dubious the day it intervened in the matter. Some of the women members affiliated to the SWC made an all-out effort to water down the incident, coercing the victim’s father to withdraw the case against the main accused.
Women’s commission chairperson Ranjana Bajpai, whose terms with the father of the main accused had came into light then, too applied all her influence to help the accused. The SWC members took an affidavit by the victim, referring to Feroz as the accused. Significantly, the same affidavit was later found attached with the applications pending with the High Court seeking stay order against the arrest of the other two accused, who are presently facing the charges.
The SWC applied all of its clout forcing the police to send Feroz to jail then. The youth kept languishing behind bars for next six months till the real accused came into light.
{{/usCountry}}The SWC applied all of its clout forcing the police to send Feroz to jail then. The youth kept languishing behind bars for next six months till the real accused came into light.
{{/usCountry}}Feroz was released later after he was found innocent. The SWC also obtained the signatures of the victim and her illiterate father on the affidavit. Her father, Sabruddin, said, “SWC had only made me sign the papers and did not tell me its content. I had faith in the SWC and thought that they would help my daughter get justice so I signed the papers.”
But, it must be noted that the statement of the victim had already been recorded before the magistrate (under section 164 CrPC) in which she had stated the name of the three who tortured her and raped her without naming Feroz.
The role of Deepa Bhatt, former Shaktivahini, is also doubtful in the entire case as she allegedly offered money to the victim’s father for withdrawing the case.
“Deepa Bhatt met me a number of times and offered me money to withdrawing the case. She also threatened me if I didn’t take the case back. She first offered me Rs 20,000 and then Rs 50,000. She came to my house in Rajni Khand to offer the money,” said Sabruddin.
After the incident took place, the SWC took the victim into custody and sent her to the state protection home despite objections from the parents. The victim stayed at the home from May 9, 2005 to December 11, 2006 and the parents kept requesting to take the girl back home but they were not allowed to take her back home.