No need for new shelter home probe team: SC
The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed a Patna High Court order directing the CBI special director to set up a fresh team to investigate the Muzaffarpur shelter home sexual abuse case in which at least 34 minor girls were sexually abused.
- Published 19.09.18
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed a Patna High Court order directing the CBI special director to set up a fresh team to investigate the Muzaffarpur shelter home sexual abuse case in which at least 34 minor girls were sexually abused.
The apex court found fault with the high court order on the ground that no purpose would be served by changing the probe team at this juncture.
"We don't see any reason for a change. That's because there is no allegation made against the team conducting investigation. We don't see any reason why the existing CBI team, probing the Muzaffarpur shelter home case, should be changed at this stage," the bench of Justice Madan B. Lokur and Justice Deepak Gupta said while staying the high court order.
The bench passed the order after attorney-general K.K. Venugopal brought to its notice the August 29 high court order directing a fresh team under the CBI special director to continue with the probe of the Muzaffarpur shelter home scandal.
The court directed that the investigation should continue under the same team which was set up by the CBI director on July 30.
The bench also told the CBI to place before it in a sealed cover the two status reports of the probe in the case that had been filed before the high court and listed the matter for further hearing on September 20.
The Supreme Court also slammed a section of the media for disclosing the identity of the Rewari gang-rape survivor in Haryana. The girl was allegedly raped by four persons while she was on way to a coaching class.
"I saw on news channel a girl was raped in Rewari. They say she was a topper in.... There is only one topper, identifying her is not a problem at all," Justice Lokur told amicus curiae Aparna Bhat and others during the hearing.
"They (TV channels) interviewed the victim's father on camera from behind his head, but in front of him there are 50 people from the village also. They know him. Where is the question of anonymity?" the bench wondered.