Ghaziabad Father Moves Supreme Court Over Daughter's Rape-Murder Case, Questions Police Investigation
The father of a four-year-old girl who was allegedly raped and murdered in Ghaziabad in March has approached the Supreme Court, stating he has lost faith in the police investigation. He claims that despite autopsy findings indicating sexual assault, the police failed to pursue the rape angle in their probe.
Father's Plea to Supreme Court
The father's plea was mentioned before the Supreme Court on Tuesday and is scheduled for a hearing on April 10. In his statement to the media, he expressed deep frustration with the police handling of the case. "A man raped and killed my daughter, but police registered the case only as murder. When they did not listen to me, my trust in getting justice through them broke. I had no option but to approach the Supreme Court," he said.
Details of the Tragic Incident
The horrific incident occurred on March 16 when the child was found murdered. According to her father, she was playing outside their home around 6 pm when a neighbor allegedly lured her away under the pretext of buying chocolate. The girl lived with her father, who works as a daily wage laborer, and her two brothers, aged 12 and 10.
When the father returned from work around 7 pm, his daughter was missing. Local children informed him that the neighbor had taken her. He immediately searched the neighbor's house and nearby shops but could not locate either the man or his daughter. Relatives and neighbors joined the search effort.
Around 8:45 pm, they found the accused in an isolated farm in the village. "When I asked where my daughter was, he told me to go ahead and I would find her," the father recounted. A short distance away, the family discovered the child bleeding from the head. Her body was found in bushes approximately 500 meters from their home.
Police Investigation and Autopsy Findings
According to police reports, the accused lured the girl away, sexually assaulted her, and killed her by repeatedly hitting her head with a brick. A senior officer detailed that the accused first took her to a local market where they ate samosa and jalebi, bought lollipops, and then proceeded to an isolated spot.
The father expressed significant distress that police chose to overlook the rape angle even after the autopsy report. "The report clearly recorded it. Yet, police did not investigate the case on that basis," he emphasized.
Legal Proceedings and Police Response
Nandgram ACP Ziauddin Ahmad stated that police have now filed a 900-page chargesheet in the district court. The chargesheet includes sections under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for murder, causing disappearance of evidence, punishment for causing death, along with provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
He explained that the First Information Report (FIR) was initially lodged for murder based on the father's complaint. However, after the autopsy revealed 11 injuries—including three blows to the head, strangulation, bite marks, and genital injuries—provisions under the POCSO Act and SC/ST Act were added.
Arrest and Subsequent Events
The accused was later arrested near his residence. During interrogation, he allegedly confessed to hiding a blood-stained handkerchief in the bushes where the girl's body was found. Officers reported that when taken to the crime scene for evidence recovery, the accused fired at them and was shot in both legs in retaliatory firing. Police recovered an illegal weapon and cartridges from the scene.
Supreme Court Hearing
During the Supreme Court hearing on Tuesday, senior advocate N Hariharan, representing the father, argued that the matter required urgent consideration. He stated, "though the postmortem shows aggravated sexual assault, there is no investigation directed towards rape." He sought the transfer of the investigation to ensure a thorough probe. Chief Justice Surya Kant responded that the court would hear the matter and decide on appropriate orders.
This case highlights critical concerns about police investigation protocols in sensitive crimes involving children and the pursuit of justice for victims' families.
