Unfortunately, a detailed order seeking answers to 39 questions in this regard from state governments was passed with much ado on December 18, 2019 was left to rest where it was nearly four years ago and the SC had asked identical questions to the Manipur police with regard to crimes against women during the Kuki-Meitei ethnic clashes after taking suo motu cognizance of the video of a horrific incident of May 4 showing stripped women being paraded naked after being sexually assaulted.
The order passed in the suo motu case “In Re: Assessment of the criminal justice system in response to sexual offences” said, “Post Nirbhaya incident, which shocked the conscience of the nation, many amendments were introduced in criminal law redefining the ambit of offences, providing for effective and speedy investigation and trial. Still, the statistics would reveal that desired results could not be achieved… The delay in such matters has, in recent times, created agitation, anxiety and unrest in the minds of the people.”
A three-judge bench headed by then CJI had said, “We are, therefore, of the view that it is necessary to take stock of the implementation of provisions of criminal law, including the said amendments, relating to rape cases and other sexual offences.”
“It is necessary to call for information with regard to status of affairs at ground level from various duty holders like investigation agencies, prosecution, medico-forensic agencies, rehabilitation, legal aid agencies and also Courts to get a holistic view to make criminal justice system responsive in the cases of this nature,” it had said.
The police lethargy in registering crime against women in Manipur and absence of prompt action in recording statement of rape survivours and witnesses, their medical examination and arrest of the accused during the Kuki-Meitei clashes had evoked strong reaction from a bench headed by CJI D Y Chandrachud.
That was precisely the focus of the SC in 2019, when it had asked, “whether the police is taking the victim for recording of the statements as soon as the commission of the offence is brought to the notice of police? Whether the police are completing the investigation within two months from registering FIRs? Whether all police stations have women officer to record statement of rape survivor? Whether zero FIRs are registered and subsequently transferred to police stations of appropriate area jurisdiction? Whether survivor’s statement recorded promptly by magistrate under section 164 of crpc? Whether the state has a standard operating procedure for recording and investigating sexual assault cases?”
In Manipur case, the SC asked the state to give details of compensation and rehabilitation measures as well as legal aid extended to rape survivours. In its 2019 order, the SC had asked identical questions and sought responses of state governments saying, “the victim goes through a mental trauma and requires immediate counselling, legal aid and medical, social and in some cases, economic rehabilitation.”