Delhi HC Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Minor’s Rape by Suspended WCD Official

The Delhi High Court on Monday took suo motu cognizance of the case involving the alleged sexual assault of a minor girl by Premoday Khakha, a suspended official of the Delhi government’s Women and Child Development Department.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula initiated the suo motu cognizance and directed the Delhi Police to guarantee the survivor’s protection and due compensation.

According to the information put forth by the counsel representing the Delhi government and police, the girl is presently admitted to a government hospital in critical condition.

The court directed the Department of Women and Child Development of the Delhi government, the police, and the Central government to submit a report on the matter. A comprehensive order from the court is awaited.

The next hearing on the matter is scheduled for September 14, 2023.

During the proceedings, the counsel for the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) informed the court that it has also taken cognizance of the matter and identified certain irregularities in the authorities’ compliance with regulations. The counsel stated that they would be submitting a report.

The Case

The suspended officer, accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting and impregnating the minor girl, was apprehended by the police on August 21 and is currently in judicial custody. His wife, Seema Rani, who allegedly provided the girl with medication to terminate her pregnancy, is also in judicial custody.

Khakha purportedly committed multiple acts of rape on the minor between November 2020 and January 2021. The victim had been residing at the accused’s residence, a family friend, following her father’s demise on October 1, 2020, as per police statements.

Both individuals were arrested after the victim testified before a magistrate at a hospital.

The case has been registered under the provisions of the POCSO Act and Indian Penal Code sections 376(2)(f) (rape committed by a relative, guardian, teacher, person in a position of trust or authority towards the woman) and 509 (word, gesture, or act intended to outrage the modesty of a woman). Additional IPC sections including 506 (criminal intimidation), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 313 (causing miscarriage without woman’s consent), and 120B (criminal conspiracy) have also been invoked in the case.