The Supreme Court on September 21 ordered a fresh investigation by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the 2012 rape and murder of a 17-year-old girl in Dharmasthala, Karnataka, observing that the manner in which the case was investigated by the local police, Karnataka CID and CBI “shocks the very conscience of the court.”
A Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva set aside the Karnataka High Court’s refusal to order reinvestigation and directed the State to constitute an SIT headed by a senior police officer and comprising investigators conversant with modern investigative technology.
The Court specifically directed that no officer associated with the earlier investigations by the Belthangady Police, CID or CBI shall be part of the new SIT. The fresh investigation is to be completed within three months, following which the police report is to be filed before the competent court.
The Court observed that in a case involving the brutal rape and murder of a minor, the investigation had been conducted in a manner that caused injustice to the victim. It noted that the possibility of the real culprit or culprits manipulating the investigation could not be ruled out.
The victim, a student of Sri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara College, went missing on October 9, 2012, after college. Her body was recovered the following day from bushes, with her left hand tied to a tree stem using her college shawl. The post-mortem indicated rape and strangulation.
The case was initially registered as a missing-person case before being altered to offences under Sections 376, 302 and 201 IPC. The probe was subsequently handled by the CID and then the CBI. All three investigations proceeded against Santhosh Rao, who was eventually acquitted by the Sessions Court for lack of evidence connecting him to the crime.
The Sessions Court had also flagged several investigative lapses, including issues concerning preservation and examination of the victim’s vaginal swab, absence of DNA results, medical evidence relating to Rao, CCTV footage, tower-dump data and examination of relevant witnesses.
The victim’s father later sought reinvestigation before the Karnataka High Court. After his death, his wife Kusumavati Gowda continued the proceedings.
Although recognizing that the judgment of acquittal necessitated a re-investigation, the High Court refused relief, holding that evidence uncollected during the initial ‘golden hour’ was unlikely to still be available.
The Supreme Court rejected this reasoning, noting that DNA analysis could still potentially match samples from the victim’s clothing with those of any suspects identified during the fresh investigation.
Relying on its decision in Neetu Kumar Nagaich v. State of Rajasthan (2020), the Court held that constitutional courts can order a fresh investigation where the original probe was not conducted properly and objectively and may have enabled someone to escape the law.
The Court, however, clarified that Santhosh Rao, having already been acquitted, cannot be subjected to a second prosecution in view of Article 20(2) of the Constitution and Section 300 CrPC. The fresh investigation will therefore not target him.
The appeal was accordingly disposed of.
The post Dharmasthala rape-murder: Supreme Court orders fresh SIT probe, says earlier investigation deeply offends the court’s sense of justice appeared first on India Legal.