New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in its charge sheet filed on Hathars rape case said that the 19-year-old victim rejected, Sandeep, one of the four accused, and this “change in their relationship” “aggravated his feelings” and “frustrated him”.
The CBI charge sheet also has a scathing indictment of UP police. The charge sheet said that despite the victim naming three people in her statement on September 19, before her death, only one person was mentioned in the police statement. It further mentioned that “though the victim alleged molestation, her medical examination regarding sexual assault was not conducted,” reported The Indian Express.
The CBI has filed the charge sheet against the four accused in Hathras court under IPC Sections 376 (rape), 376 (D) (gangrape), 302 (murder), and relevant sections of the SC/ST Act against Sandeep (20), his uncle Ravi (35), Ramu (26) and Luv Kush (23). However, the prime accused of the incident have been in judicial custody since their arrest in September.
The 19 years old Dalit woman was allegedly assaulted by the four on September 14 in Hathras, UP. The victim died a fortnight later at Safdarjung Hospital in Delhi.
As per the CBI charge sheet, the victim and Sandeep lived nearby, and “he developed acquaintance with the victim two/three years back which gradually turned into a love affair.” It states that “it also came on record” that they “used to meet in isolated places”, and that “these facts are supported by many villagers”.
In the charge sheet, it is mentioned that Sandeep made numerous calls from his three phone numbers to a phone number belonging to the victim’s family. However, family members denied this and said they never contacted or spoke to him over the phone.
The CBI charge sheet against the accused said “During her examination on September 22, the victim categorically stated that she was gang-raped by the four accused persons; she also named them in her dying declaration… It establishes that on September 14, the victim was gang-raped at the bajra field when she was alone. The investigation also revealed that all four accused were present in the village or nearby place, which corroborates the allegation of the victim,” quoted The Indian Express.
The medical examination is also mentioned in the charge sheet which was done by a doctor of the Department of Forensic Medicine at AMU on September 22. The medical examiner stated that “there are no signs of vaginal/anal intercourse. There is evidence of physical assault (injuries over the neck and the back).”
However, after the CBI took up the case, a Multi-Institutional Medical Board (MIMB) was constituted by the Forensic Department at AIIMS, which said, “The possibility of sexual assault can’t be ruled out as minimal bleeding was detected microscopically after one week of assault as alleged in the case. However, the pattern of injuries sustained during an incident of sexual violence may show considerable variation. This may range from the complete absence of injuries (more frequently) to grievous injuries (very rare). In this case, since there was a delay in reporting/documentation/forensic examination for sexual assault, these factors could be responsible for the absence of significant visible signs of genital injury.”