Hathras Fast-Track Court Clears Professor in 'Lachar Beti' Case Following Victim Retractions
A fast-track court in Hathras has delivered a verdict of acquittal for a college professor embroiled in the high-profile 'Lachar Beti' case. The decision came after the three women who were presented as victims in the prosecution withdrew their allegations during the trial proceedings, effectively unraveling a case that had accused the educator of serious charges including rape, sexual harassment, and abuse of authority.
Case Origins and Initial Allegations
The case against professor Rajneesh Kumar, aged 59, first came to light through an anonymous complaint submitted in the name of 'Lachar Beti', which translates to 'helpless daughter'. This complaint was directed to the chairperson of the National Commission for Women and included attached photographs and videos that allegedly depicted Kumar engaging in inappropriate touching of female students within the college premises.
Following this complaint, police authorities at the Hathras Gate police station registered a First Information Report (FIR) under specific sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The charges included Section 64(2) for rape, Section 68 for sexual intercourse by a person in authority, and Section 75 for sexual harassment, alongside relevant provisions of the Information Technology Act. The FIR was formally lodged on the complaint of sub-inspector Sunil Kumar.
Investigators had alleged that professor Kumar had systematically exploited students over an extended period by making promises of job opportunities and improved academic marks, while simultaneously threatening to circulate obscene videos. After the FIR was filed, Kumar went into hiding and was subsequently arrested in Prayagraj on March 19 of the previous year while attempting to secure anticipatory bail.
Courtroom Developments and Victim Statements
However, when the matter proceeded to trial, a significant turn of events occurred as none of the three women supported the prosecution's narrative in court. Defence lawyer Virender Singh stated, "The court on Tuesday acquitted my client due to lack of evidence and the statements given by the women." He further elaborated that the women informed the court "the statement against the professor was given after being pressured by the police" and highlighted that investigators had failed to produce "any authentic certificate about the video and photos of the women and my client."
Judicial Scrutiny of Digital Evidence
The court conducted a thorough examination of the digital evidence presented in the case and identified substantial gaps in its handling. The judicial observation noted, "No evidence is on file regarding where the DVD was first produced, by whom, where it was sent, whether the video contained in the DVD was examined by an expert, or whether any certificate was obtained to the effect that the video contained in the DVD is not likely to have been tampered with."
With these critical questions remaining unresolved, the court expressed that "The possibility cannot be ruled out that the said video may have been fabricated and sent by someone with the sole purpose of framing the accused." Consequently, the court held that the charges against professor Kumar were not proved beyond reasonable doubt and declared that he "deserves to be acquitted of the charges."
This acquittal marks a significant judicial outcome in a case that had attracted considerable attention due to its serious nature and the involvement of digital evidence. The court's emphasis on procedural integrity and evidentiary standards underscores the legal principles governing such sensitive matters.
