Another witness in Murthal case

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 3

Details of another witness in the Murthal rape case and his statement today surfaced in the Punjab and Haryana High Court during the hearing of the case, prompting the amicus curiae or the friend of the court to say it was virtually impossible for the state to drop rape charges with such evidence coming out in the open.

As the case came up for resumed hearing, witness Raj Kumar’s statement came to the Judges’ notice after a damning report by an Additional Sessions Judge hearing the case in Sonepat was placed before the Division Bench of Justices SS Saron and Arun Palli.

The statement was recorded on April 15, but never given prominence in the High Court by the special investigating team constituted to probe the case. Reacting to the developments, amicus Anupam Gupta lashed out at the investigating agency, blaming it for keeping the court in the dark about his statement.

The witness, Raj Kumar, in his statement before the police under Section 161 of the CrPC, said he was travelling in his car on February 22 on the Delhi-Kurukshetra stretch. At about 2.30 am, he saw between 10 and 15 boys burning and damaging cars.

He also saw three or four boys dragging a girl from her hair and arm near a car ahead of his vehicle to bushes near Sukhdev dhaba. All the while she was screaming for help. Raj Kumar added that he would be in a position to show the cops the bushes in case he was taken to the spot.

Referring to his statement, Gupta said Raj Kumar had almost reiterated his earlier statement before the police. Gupta added that his claims were similar to the one made by another traveller-witness Bobby Joshi, yet his statement was not given due prominence in the High Court.

Joshi had alleged, on the basis of his conversation with two Ludhiana women, that girls were forcibly taken to the fields. An FIR in the matter was registered subsequently on March 30 after the Haryana Police was admonished by the High Court for its inaction. The offence under Section 376-D of the Indian Penal Code for gang rape was added later on.

A tale of lies

Haryana’s claims that the web portal story on Murthal rape was a tale of lies has come under a cloud. An Additional Sessions Judge hearing the case has asserted that prosecution witness Tariq Anwar’s statement recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC revealed that he had been “threatened by higher police officers”.

The Judge had stated that it appeared that no scientific or professional investigation had been done to go deep into the matter.

The Judge had said vital clues to trace the prosecutrix were ignored and no sincere effort put to reach the prosecutrix or victim. It could safely be said the investigation had been done in a hush up manner and was just an eyewash.

About 10 months after journalist Anwar recorded conversation with an alleged victim’s mother before carrying the report, the High Court was told on Saturday that he had admitted fabricating evidence in his statement recorded before the magistrate.

The state’s claim had led to a demand by the amicus for prosecuting the journalist for creating evidence. Appearing for Haryana, Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta claimed that the voice was of Anwar’s sister-in-law. Voice sampling had confirmed it.

Amicus Anupam Gupta said the journalist did not enjoy any special privilege or immunity and the state might consider his prosecution.

Mehta, on a previous date of hearing, had claimed that the former web portal journalist was not cooperating despite repeated requests by the SIT incharge.

Meanwhile, another story of an Australian woman being raped is turning out to be a product of imagination. Its author’s statement, too, had been recorded before the magistrate.