SATYAMA DUBEY V. UNION OF INDIA

(HATHRAS GANG RAPE CASE)

CASE COMMENTARY

Petitioner: – Satyama Dubey

Respondent: – Union of India

Writ Petition no: – 296/2020

Court: – Supreme Court of India (Criminal Court of Jurisdiction)

Date of judgement: – 2^nd march 2023

Judges bench: – Justice Jaspreet Singh & Justice Rajan Roy

Charges: – Murder (302 IPC), Gang Rape (376D IPC) and violation of SC and ST Act,1989.

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

In September 2020, the entire nation was shocked by a horrifying incident occur in Hathras, U.P State. The country which was still suffering from Ariyalur Gang rape case, witnesses another traumatizing crime of a 19year old Dalit girl who was grievously raped, blunderingly assaulted in the land of Hathras. This crime and injustice not only committed against that Dalit victim but against all female of nation. As this incident challenges the security of women and their right to live life with dignity along with fearless environment.

In the early morning on 14^th September 2020 when Dalit girl with her mother went to her land for cutting grass. The Dalit girl was then sexually assaulted and left to die in field by four accused men. Her mother then found her injured body after she hear her scream. Then victim mother along with her brother went to police station for filling FIR but police refuse to register the matter. Following same day victim provide name Sandeep Sisodia who was involve in crime and the FIR was registered against him under IPC Section 354.

In very same day police admitted victim in Primary Health Centre hospital for treatment but doctors transfer her to AMUJN medical college after identifying her critical condition. The delay in treatment was cause due to police officers mal administration refused to file FIR.

After treatment when she gains consciousness then her statement was taken on 15^th September 2020 in which she mentioned name of all accused and she confess that she was brutally assaulted by accused. The police added section 307 of IPC for Murder attempt And Sandeep Sisodia was convicted by police.

On September 21^st,2020, her statement was recorded Infront of magistrate. Where she gives names Sandeep Sisodia, Ravi thakur, Ramu thakur and Luvkhush as the assaulter for sexual assault. After which police arrested all assaulter for murder and gang rape. The test report of victim clearly clarifies that there was use of coercion but medical team waited for forensics report for confirmation of penetration.

On 22^nd September 2020 swab test was performed for sexual assault confirmation. This is nearly impossible to identify the trace of sperm because test was conducted after week. In mean time Victims conditions growing worse. On September 28^th, 2020 she was transferred to Delhi in Safdarjung Hospital. Victim chances of survival getting worse. The AMU doctors claims that she was referred to Delhi AIIMS but she was admitted in Safdarjung hospital.

On September 20^th, 2020 victim took her last breath and painfully died in hospital without witnessing justice. According to her mother in early morning around 2.30 am police officers without informing victim family and without taking there consent secretly took victim’s body for cremating. But police officers denied allegations and reply all process was consensual.

After this event this case took new direction political parties start protest and media highlighted this case seeking justice for 19year Dalit girl. After that state government alloted Investigating force to search this case. While investigation the UP ADJ, Prashant Kumar, claimed that the Dalit girl was not sexually assaulted. He was criticized for pronouncing this statement as swab test was taken after few weeks and post mortem report only mentioned several injuries in her spine and marks on her neck, no trace of semen.

When this case attains so much popularity and attention. On October 1^st, 2020 Section 144(CrPC) was apply in Bolgarhi village, Hathras, Uttar Pradesh. This step was taken by court for protecting victim family and preventing them from many leaders and media persons for entering village. Same day Suo moto cognizance was taken by Allahabad high court and they issued summons to the administrative authorities involve in this case for hearing the defenses. The court was distress by the act of administration officers who cremated the body of Dalit girl in absence of any notice or information to the victim family. Later on Supreme Court take over this case and direct CBI to take over all investigation.

On 18^th December 2020 CBI submitted chargesheet and final report Infront of Supreme Court consisting whole investigation detail. The chargesheet was filed against all four accused under sections

Section 302 IPC deals Murder punishment.
Section 376 IPC deals Rape punishment.
Section 376A of IPC deals with Punishment for causing Death or resulting in persistent vegetative state of victims.
Section 376D of IPC for commission of gang rape.
Section 3(2)(v) of SC and ST Act,1989.

ISSUE RAISED:

Did victim fail to obtain justice because she belongs to Dalit community.
The mishandling of case by police officers and administrations authorities raised doubt about the integrity of police investigation.
The decision of police to cremate victim’s body without family consent was viewed as the attempt to destruction of evidence and cover up crime. who knows the real motive of this whole step taken by police officers.
All issue reflects the problem in social and legal systems in India and raised questioned that how judiciary rectify and address these failures to ensure justice for victims.

CONTENSIONS: –

Petitioner’s Contention: –

Petitioner claims that police authorities do not expeditiously registered FIR and cause delay in investigation process. They argued that if they immediately take action then may be victim get justice sooner.
Petitioner argued that police mishandled the investigation by cremating victim’s body without consent of her family. Petitioner put allegation that this action was performed for destroying evidence and lead the case away from justice.
Petitioner contended that case clearly highlight the caste discrimination as accused belong from higher caste and victim faces misbehavior of higher authorities on sole reason because she belongs from Dalit community.

Respondent’s Contention: –

Respondent counter petitioner claim and response that FIR was recorded as soon as all formalities need to performed by victims has been fulfilled.
Respondent on allegation regarded to cremating victim body contended that as victim body start decomposing rapidly so they have to take action and all the process they perform was done under law and order.
Respondent ask petitioner to show evidence before putting false accusation on defense in regard of caste discrimination.

RATIONAL

This case highlighted the enduring issue of caste discrimination in India. The victim belongs to Dalit community and the accused belong from higher caste. This not only leads to caste discrimination but also create obstacles in path of justice, protection and fair trial rights of victims.

After the lot of battle and protest against injustice and discrimination supreme court after conducting trial and proceeding which run approximately two year and six months. The final judgment was pronounced by Supreme Court on 2^nd march 2023. The court not found Sandeep guilty for rape and murder. He was held liable under Sec 304 under IPC and SC/ST act violation. Additionally, court pronounced him imprisonment for life and 50,000 Rs penalty. Remaining three accused was not held liable for any accusation raised by petitioner against them. It was also noted that the principle of ‘Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus’ is not applicable in India. This maxim means that what is false in one thing is false in everything. Just because the half accusation of victim was discovered wrong that doesn’t mean her full statement become wrong and void. The CBI conducted that if police had perform their duty in mean time then may be present situation were different. Court strictly criticizes administrative authority who do not perform their duty.

DEFECT OF LAW

The Hathras rape case highlighted several significant legal and procedural shortcomings, which drew widespread criticism and raised concerns about justice, human rights, and the treatment of victims. Following are some key points: –

When police authorities cause delay in filling FIR this undermined trust in law enforcement and raised doubts about the impartiality of the investigation.
We are having longest constitution in comparison to other nation then also law fail to provide justice and protection to victim and her family.
The police authority under whom people feels safe and protected and from small age we taught that there are rule and regulation among them which they have to follow before taking any action, then also they secretly cremated victim body without consent of her family.
In Rape Case: – The Criminal Law Amendment Act,2013emphasizes examination as well as treatment of the victim, both physical and psychological in addition to mere evidence collection. But in this case, physical examination was done many days later.

Overall, the Hathras rape case underscored the need for reforms in legal and law enforcement procedures to ensure swift and fair justice for victims of sexual violence, uphold human rights, and restore public trust in the justice system so that women can feel safe and protected and can live freely in society without any type of fear.

INFERENCE

The Hathras rape case emphasize deep-seated issues of caste discrimination, systemic Negligence in law enforcement, and provocation in ensuring justice for victims of sexual violence in India. The brutal assault and tragic death of the Dalit victim sparked national outrage, highlighting the urgent need for reforms in legal and procedural frameworks. The case exposed lapses in handling evidence, delayed justice, and the unauthorized cremation of the victim’s body without her family’s consent by police authority, further eroding trust in authorities. While the Supreme Court’s verdict held one accused accountable under lesser charges and acquittal of remaining three accused, it also criticized administrative negligence and emphasized the overbearing for systemic reforms to protect the rights and dignity of all individuals, regardless of caste or gender discrimination. Article 2 of Indian constitution which guarentees every person Right to life with dignity which also includes the Right to have a Decent burial / cremation / last rites as per traditions or will of the deceased. This landmark case serves as a poignant call to action for comprehensive reforms in India’s legal and law enforcement systems to ensure swift, fair, and impartial justice for victims of sexual violence and protection of Female in India.

Submitted by: –Rishu Verma.

College: -City Law College