BENGALURU: The Congress govt in Karnataka is in the dock again for a perceived delay in investigating a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) case against BS Yediyurappa, former chief minister, BJP’s tallest functionary in the state, and veteran politician.
Barely a month ago, the govt had faced immense criticism for delaying action in the Prajwal Revanna serial rape case.Critics say the govt had again delayed action in Yediyurappa’s case for political gain.
Some Congress functionaries admit Congress was mindful of the ramifications on its Lok Sabha election prospects if it acted against Yediyurappa. It was particularly wary of angering the Lingayat community, a dominant socio-political group, to which the former CM belongs.
The timeline of the case suggests this. A complaint was filed by the late mother of the 17-year-old victim, accusing the former CM of molesting her daughter during a meeting at his residence in Dollars Colony on Feb 2.
After much toing and froing, Sadashivanagar police registered a case on March 14, booking Yediyurappa under the Pocso Act and Section 354A (sexual harassment) of the IPC. Karnataka DGP& IG Alok Mohan subsequently transferred the investigation to Crime Investigation Department (CID).
In April, CID summoned Yediyurappa, collected his voice sample, and recorded his statement. Thereafter, the investigation slowed. Even the victim’s statement wasn’t recorded.
‘Aim of Act defeated’
“The primary purpose of the Pocso Act was to provide speedy justice to child victims of sexual offences in a childfriendly manner,” said Supreme Court advocate Brijesh Kalappa. “The law states a Pocso trial should be completed within a year from a special court taking cognizance of the offence. It also states that the evidence of the victim should be recorded within 30 days of such cognizance. However, there is a considerable gap between what the law prescribes and what happened here. But in Yediyurappa’s case, police and the govt have erred at every step, thus delaying justice for the victim.”
Complicating matters, the govt decided to form a special investigation team (SIT) to probe the case, raising eyebrows about its motives. Officials say the SIT can only submit its report to the govt, which must then present it to the cabinet for further action. This has led to speculation about potential political manoeuvring.
Probe integrity questioned
Incidentally, the 54-year-old complainant, who had accused Yediyurappa, died last month due to lung cancer. Her death has sparked all sorts of specu- lation within political and social circles. Critics argue that the govt’s failure to clarify circumstances has only fuelled doubts about the investigation’s integrity.
What was more intriguing was remarks of home minister G Parameshwara at the time the case came to light. “Action cannot be taken just because someone lodges a complaint. An investigation must be conducted first. Based on facts and findings, police will decide the future course of action,” Parameshwara had said.
He went on to say, “Preliminary investigation will reveal everything: Whether the case was registered with a vested motive or something else. We don’t see any politi- cal motive behind it. There are also reports saying the woman is facing mental health issues. We must consider many aspects before proceeding.” The benefit of doubts like these are rarely accorded to common people.
Fresh petition in court
The case returned to the spotlight after the victim’s brother filed a petition in court earlier this week. He alleged that despite the case being registered on March 14, the investigation had not progressed. The petitioner urged the court to order Yediyurappa’s arrest and interrogation.
Congress ministers have denied claims that the progress of investigation was slow or that political considerations were involved. They emphasised the importance of due process.
“The investigation did not stall,” Parameshwara said. “We were awaiting FSL reports. Procedurally what must be done, is being done, because he [Yediyurappa] is a senior politician, a VIP. So, after proper verification they [police] are going ahead because if anything goes wrong, they will be blamed.”
Barely a month ago, the govt had faced immense criticism for delaying action in the Prajwal Revanna serial rape case.Critics say the govt had again delayed action in Yediyurappa’s case for political gain.
Some Congress functionaries admit Congress was mindful of the ramifications on its Lok Sabha election prospects if it acted against Yediyurappa. It was particularly wary of angering the Lingayat community, a dominant socio-political group, to which the former CM belongs.
The timeline of the case suggests this. A complaint was filed by the late mother of the 17-year-old victim, accusing the former CM of molesting her daughter during a meeting at his residence in Dollars Colony on Feb 2.
After much toing and froing, Sadashivanagar police registered a case on March 14, booking Yediyurappa under the Pocso Act and Section 354A (sexual harassment) of the IPC. Karnataka DGP& IG Alok Mohan subsequently transferred the investigation to Crime Investigation Department (CID).
In April, CID summoned Yediyurappa, collected his voice sample, and recorded his statement. Thereafter, the investigation slowed. Even the victim’s statement wasn’t recorded.
‘Aim of Act defeated’
“The primary purpose of the Pocso Act was to provide speedy justice to child victims of sexual offences in a childfriendly manner,” said Supreme Court advocate Brijesh Kalappa. “The law states a Pocso trial should be completed within a year from a special court taking cognizance of the offence. It also states that the evidence of the victim should be recorded within 30 days of such cognizance. However, there is a considerable gap between what the law prescribes and what happened here. But in Yediyurappa’s case, police and the govt have erred at every step, thus delaying justice for the victim.”
Complicating matters, the govt decided to form a special investigation team (SIT) to probe the case, raising eyebrows about its motives. Officials say the SIT can only submit its report to the govt, which must then present it to the cabinet for further action. This has led to speculation about potential political manoeuvring.
Probe integrity questioned
Incidentally, the 54-year-old complainant, who had accused Yediyurappa, died last month due to lung cancer. Her death has sparked all sorts of specu- lation within political and social circles. Critics argue that the govt’s failure to clarify circumstances has only fuelled doubts about the investigation’s integrity.
What was more intriguing was remarks of home minister G Parameshwara at the time the case came to light. “Action cannot be taken just because someone lodges a complaint. An investigation must be conducted first. Based on facts and findings, police will decide the future course of action,” Parameshwara had said.
He went on to say, “Preliminary investigation will reveal everything: Whether the case was registered with a vested motive or something else. We don’t see any politi- cal motive behind it. There are also reports saying the woman is facing mental health issues. We must consider many aspects before proceeding.” The benefit of doubts like these are rarely accorded to common people.
Fresh petition in court
The case returned to the spotlight after the victim’s brother filed a petition in court earlier this week. He alleged that despite the case being registered on March 14, the investigation had not progressed. The petitioner urged the court to order Yediyurappa’s arrest and interrogation.
Congress ministers have denied claims that the progress of investigation was slow or that political considerations were involved. They emphasised the importance of due process.
“The investigation did not stall,” Parameshwara said. “We were awaiting FSL reports. Procedurally what must be done, is being done, because he [Yediyurappa] is a senior politician, a VIP. So, after proper verification they [police] are going ahead because if anything goes wrong, they will be blamed.”