INDIA: A 13 year old girl is sexually assaulted but police fail to arrest the perpetrator

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been informed by a local human rights organisation in Uttar Pradesh, the People’s Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR), that a 13-year-old girl was sexually assaulted by her neighbour.  In an attempt to rape the girl the accused entered their house and attacked her whilst she was sleeping.  The girl’s father went to the police but they refused to lodge a complaint until the PVCHR sent a complaint to the police. Despite this, the police have still not arrested the man who tried on two occasions to sexually assault the girl, nor investigated the crime. The neighbour continues to live next door without arrest or investigation by the police and has issued violent threats towards the girl.

CASE DETAILS:

The 13- year-old daughter of Arjun Rajbhar, Meera (name changed) is a permanent residence of Baghwanala Mouza Hall, Hukulgang, under the jurisdiction of Jaitpura Police Station, Varanasi district, Uttar Pradesh. She is a student in class VIII.

On the 23 August 2008 at approximately 1 am Subash Rajbhar, son of Antu Rajbhar and neighbour to Arjun Rajbhar’s family, entered their house.  Subash Rajbhar then attempted to rape Meera, covering her mouth to prevent her from alerting attention.  During this struggle Meera was able to cry out and her parents who were sleeping close by chased Subash out of the house.

He ran and locked himself inside his own house so that Arjun was unable to reach him.  Arjun immediately informed the officer in charge at Saraiya police out-post, by mobile phone.  Police personnel arrived but Subhas refused to open his door so the police returned to the station.

On the next day Meera’s father submitted a written complaint to the police at the out-post and on the 25 August to the Station Officer (SO) of Jaitpura Police Station. However, the SO at Jaitpura Police Station refused to accept Arjun’s complaint against Subhas so he sent a written complaint to the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) at Varanasi through registered post (No.EU226937316IN).  But no First Information Report (FIR) was lodged nor any investigations begun. So on the 28 August the PVCHR sent a complaint letter to the SSP of Varanasi requesting an FIR to be lodged and the arrest of Subhas.

Upon receiving this complaint the SO lodged an FIR against Subhash under Section 354 (assault or criminal force to women with intent to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 punishable by two years imprisonment, or fine or both.

However, instead of the police performing their public duty and conducting an investigation they are instead making threats, towards Meera’s father and putting pressure on the family to withdraw the complaint.

On the 28 August Subhas attempted to commit the same offence on Meera again but she was able to escape. During this struggle the accused threatened Meera saying that he will ruin her life if she discloses any information to the police.

As Subhas is Meera’s neighbour this has greatly disrupted the normal functioning of her life as she is unable to leave the house normally or attend her school.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

PVCHR has informed that the accused is notorious for this behaviour and this is not his first offence.  He has attempted to rape another girl Manju (name changed), daughter of Bhagawati Rajbhar, living on the same street.  However, Manju’s parents did not disclose this incident out of fear of Subhas, because of the implications to the honour of the family, and to prevent being insulted or ostracised by the community.

In India the female is responsible for the family honour and this is maintained through her chastity.  If a women or girl is raped, rather than the perpetrator of the crime–the man–being punished, the guilt is often assumed to be that of the female. The victim will be accused of allowing the man to bring shame to her dignity, tempting him in some way.

The women or girl who has been a victim or rape or even an indecent assault by the opposite sex will be looked down upon by their peers and marginalised, in most cases unable to marry.  For Meera the repeated assaults by Subhas will be highly traumatising for a young girl, particularly the proximity of the perpetrator and continued threats of sexual violence and malice. Significantly her movements have become restricted, preventing her from continuing her education.  An environment of such physical and psychological abuse will have a marked effect on the mental health of the victim.

Families, or women and girls, are often reluctant to report such cases of sexual assault for fear of reprisals and dishonour contributing to few successful convictions in court.  Furthermore, those trying to seek punishment for the perpetrators may dilute the severity of the crime from rape to assault in order to protect the victim from being unmarriageable.

Under Indian law the IPC Section 375 dictates the actions that constitute rape and are punishable under law–significantly this does not include marital rape–and is punishable by imprisonment for no less than seven years and liable to a fine.

The Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C), 1973 Section 4 requires by law all cases under the IPC to be investigated, inquired into, and tried. Section 161 (examination of witnesses by police) does not include guidance on dealing with victims who are likely to be highly traumatised, such as providing counselling etc. Often in cases of rape the victim will wash themselves removing all evidence of the crime which is vital as evidence in court and for successful prosecution.  Public education campaigns could bring awareness on this issue and encourage victims of sexual assault to go immediately for examination but low expectations, silencing of the crime, poor image of police administration and procedures prevents this, further contributing to low rates of conviction.

Corruption is preventing Meera’s case from being properly investigated in accordance with Section 4 of the IPC. Furthermore, Meera’s family are from a poor, slum area and have little opportunity to exert power or authority, or to demand their rights. Often perpetrators of crimes can prevent investigation and arrest through political and financial leverage as the police administration is intimately entwined with the political party in power, with appointment of senior police officers being made by state politicians.

FURTHER INFORMATION:

Internationally the rights of women are enshrined in the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women. In practice women have few rights in India and are largely seen to be the property of their husbands: it is widely believed amongst both men and women that it is a husband’s prerogative to be able to use violence against his wife as he sees fit.  Violence against women constitutes a fundamental violation of their rights and denial of equality and dignity.

India did not respond to communication sent by the Special Rapporteur on violence against women in 2006. The UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) South Asia Office reports that in its Gender Equity Index 2007–based on economic activity, empowerment and education–India has the lowest equity ranking in South Asia with little progress seen over the last four years.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the authorities mentioned below demanding an investigation into the sexual assault of a female minor by her neighbour and continued threats and abuse.  The perpetrator must be arrested and punished in accordance with the law.

The AHRC has written a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences calling for intervention in this case.

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER