Calcutta High Court orders SIT probe into Murshidabad minor’s ‘rape-murder’

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has ordered a fresh probe by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the kidnapping, rape and murder of a 13-year-old girl in Murshidabad, observing that the earlier investigation suffered from “serious lacunae” and failed to inspire confidence.

The bench of Justice Jay Sengupta termed the case “gruesome” and said the probe conducted so far appeared “inchoate and half-hearted”, warning that such lapses go to the root of the matter and could prejudice the cause of justice.

Accordingly, the court directed the constitution of a five-member SIT headed by senior IPS officer Pranav Kumar to carry out further investigation and submit its report before the trial court.

The trial court has been asked to proceed with the case after receiving the SIT’s report and completing necessary formalities, including alteration or addition of charges if required.

The case dates back to January 2024, when the minor went missing on January 22. Her decomposed body with severe injuries was found in a field on January 27.

The court noted that the initial autopsy report had omissions, prompting a second autopsy at SSKM Hospital on judicial directions. It also recorded that provisions of the POCSO Act were added only after court intervention, despite indications of sexual assault.

Hearing a plea by the victim’s mother seeking a fresh probe, the court examined allegations of major lapses, including failure to recover the victim’s mobile phone, inadequate analysis of call records and the inability to identify the exact place of occurrence.

The court also took note of allegations that persons named by the complainant, including a local MLA, were neither examined nor made part of the investigation and that there were attempts to pressurise the family.

It was described as “very exceptional” the allegation that a political figure was present during the post-mortem, saying such aspects required deeper scrutiny.

Observing that the mere addition of an accused during trial cannot substitute a proper investigation, the court said all available leads ought to have been thoroughly explored, especially in a case involving allegations of political influence.