Not One Officer, not One Rank, every Single One shielded the Accused: Supreme Court constitutes SIT in 4 year old child Rape Case

In one of its most scathing interventions in recent memory, the Supreme Court wrested the investigation into the rape of a four-year-old girl in Gurugram entirely from the Haryana Police, constituting a Special Investigation Team under senior woman IPS officer Nazneen Bhasin after finding overwhelming evidence that the police, from the Commissioner down to the Sub Inspector, had systematically worked to shield the accused, downgrade the offence, and re-traumatise the victim in the process.

The case came before a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul Pancholi on a writ petition by the child's parents, who alleged that the Haryana Police had deliberately sabotaged the investigation. Their suspicions proved well-founded: despite prima facie evidence pointing squarely to the offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, the graver provision, the police registered the FIR under Section 10, which covers aggravated sexual assault, a materially lesser charge.

The Court also found that the child had been subjected to repeated questioning in circumstances that compounded her trauma, that the Judicial Magistrate had recorded her statement in close proximity to the accused, and that a doctor at Max Hospital had altered the medical report prepared after examining the victim. The Child Welfare Committee, tasked with the child's protection, fared no better, the bench found serious reason to doubt whether its members held the qualifications required for such sensitive work, with CJI Kant observing they had treated the victim "as if she was a table or chair."

The Court's observations from the bench were unsparing. Justice Bagchi demanded, "If this is the quality of understanding sensitivity in case of a 4-year-old child, what do you expect of the rule of law?" CJI Surya Kant added, "Shame on them! If the state has any respect for law, they will transfer them!" In its written order, the Court recorded that this was "a glaring case where police have made all-out efforts to protect the accused," and that the child's trauma had been multiplied by the "insensitive, reckless, irresponsible and completely unlawful method of investigation." The Commissioner of Police and the Investigating Officer were removed from the case. Show cause notices were issued to the delinquent officers on why disciplinary action should not follow.

The Max Hospital doctor was directed to explain the altered medical report. The Principal Secretary of Haryana was directed to file an affidavit justifying the appointment of the CWC members, who were separately asked to furnish their own explanation.