The Dalit Girl From Hathras Was Not The First, Justice For Rape Victims Is An Uphill Task In UP
The tragic death of a 19-year-old Dalit girl from Hathras on Tuesday has caused much outrage in Uttar Pradesh and across the country.
The horrific crime also brought to light the struggle of the family of the victim to bring the perpetrators to justice.
10 days to add rape charge
In the case of the Hathras gang-rape victim, it took the police ten days after the heinous crime to add rape charges against the accused and another day more before the four men were finally arrested.
Ever since the case surfaced, the Hathras has been trying to play it down and even now continues to claim that the rape allegation has not been proven yet.
As outrageous as it might sound, this is not the first time in Uttar Pradesh, those who are supposed to give justice to the survivors have failed them.
A recent study by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative and the Association for Advocacy and Legal Initiatives has shown how difficult it is for the rape survivors and their families to fight for justice.
The report titled Barriers in Accessing Justice has documented 14 cases from Uttar Pradesh where police refused and failed to register complaints of survivors of sexual assault.?
Grim picture
The 14 case studies are first-hand accounts of reporting sexual assault to the police by survivors and caseworkers from the seven districts of Aligarh, Amroha, Auraiya, Lucknow, Jhansi, Jaunpur, and Muzaffarnagar in Uttar Pradesh. Of the 14 cases profiled, 11 were complaints of rape and 3 were complaints of gang-rape.?
The findings of the study describe that survivors faced delay, derision, pressure, and severe harassment when they approach the police to report complaints and seek the registration of a First Information Report.?
The survivors¡¯ experiences revealed that they faced discrimination by the police on the basis of gender and caste, impeding their access to justice at the gateway to the legal system. These experiences amplified the trauma of survivors and affected their mental and physical well-being.?
The findings include:
1. Police delayed and/or refused to register a First Information Report (FIR) on receipt of complaints of sexual assault
Of the 14 cases, FIRs of rape were registered only in 11 cases. Of the 11 cases, the time taken by the police to finally register an FIR ranged from 2 to 228 days. In six cases, police registered an FIR after complaints were escalated to senior police officers, and in the remaining cases, the FIR was registered after a court order.?
2. Women police officers did not record the first information of an offence of sexual assault?
In 12 out of 14 cases, the survivors had to describe the details of sexual assault to a male police officer instead of a woman, contrary to the process laid down under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).?
3. Police disbelieve and discriminate against sexual assault survivors?
Survivors revealed that police disbelieved them from the onset and often subjected them to misogynistic remarks. They also felt that police assume they are taking undue advantage of laws and make false claims to implicate men.?
4. Dalit survivors of sexual violence face discrimination
Dalit survivors expressed experiencing the double burden of discrimination on both gender and caste. The accounts of survivors and caseworkers revealed this discrimination based on caste further impeded women¡¯s access to justice.?
5. Police routinely pressure complainants to settle or compromise?
Survivors and caseworkers underlined that the police mount pressure and intimidate them to look for solutions outside the legal system. Police try various coercive tactics to push survivors to settle or compromise by threatening to implicate their family members, or forcing marriage of the survivor and alleged perpetrator; and/or by forcing the survivors to dilute their written complaints.?
6. Survivors were not aware of the immediate remedies to challenge the police failure
While all 14 survivors exercised their right to complain to the district Superintendent of Police after facing refusal at the police station, they needed external assistance and guidance which led to delay in accessing remedies. The time taken by all the 14 survivors to complain to the SP, from the time of first being refused at the police station, ranged from 1 to 111 days approximately. The time taken to complain to the judicial Magistrate ranged from 3 to 74 days approximately from the time of complaining to the SP, and 4 to 146 days approximately from the time of first approaching the police station.?
7. Survivors and caseworkers did not know about legal provisions
Survivors and caseworkers shared that they did not know that punitive action can be taken against police personnel for not filing an FIR in a case of a sexual assault, under Section 166A(c), IPC. On hearing of this possibility, they expressed apprehensions that complaining against police would lead to repercussions for them, and could jeopardise the registration and investigation in the case of sexual violence. They did not believe that police would be impartially prosecuted even if the process is initiated.?
8. Non-registration of the FIR leading to harassment and distrust
The survivors unanimously shared that delay in registration of FIR led to feeling re-victimised. The police failure to register the FIR in the first instance caused suffering, helplessness, and confusion; with serious impact on their physical and mental well-being.
