Bombay HC Dismisses A Petition Seeking Transfer Of A Rape Case To CBI

The Bombay High Court dismissed a petition seeking transferred of a rape case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

A Division Bench comprised of Acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep Marne of the Bombay High Court dismissed a PIL seeking transfer of a case to the CBI in which 7 tribal girls from a shelter home in Nashik were raped by the shelter home’s head.

The petition was filed by Rajesh P Khobragade. In his plea, he pointed out the hardships a victims face while coping with the incident.

“It is important to understand the minor children have gone through mental trauma, pain, and agony hence they are required to provide Financial Assistant as well as Mental Assistant and adequate provisions of blending them in society without any trauma. It should also be noted that these minor girls were sexually assaulted, raped, and tortured while under the guise of a shelter home. As a result, it is critical that the State Government provide them with immediate financial assistance/funds,” the petition stated.

Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Advocate Abhijeet Naik informed the court that 7 FIRs had been filed. He also asked for the formation of a committee.

Chief Public Prosecutor Aruna Pai informed the court that the chargesheets for all FIRs had been filed, following which the petitioner’s advocate stated that the trial should be completed within a year. 

The court stated that it cannot ask the special court to consider a 2020 case before the 2015 case.

“Do you know how many cases are currently pending in special courts? Every litigant hopes that his or her case will be heard first. We cannot instruct the special court to hear a 2020 case first while keeping the 2015 case pending.”

The bench further said that all the committees were in place under the Act and the said acts were still in effect.

In response to Advocate Naik’s request for financial assistance for the victims,the court said that there were schemes under the POCSO Act for the compensation of victims and the issue was the implementation of schemes.

While dismissing the PIL, the court stated, “We do not know how many trials are currently taking place before the special court. When a case is brought before the trial court, it is expedited. The petitioner may make use of the POCSO Act’s compensation scheme. If the request is not granted, they may file a complaint with the court.”