The apex court has said the trial would be in accordance with provisions of Ranbir Penal Code, applicable in Jammu and Kashmir. The court added that the trial in the case must be fair to accused as well as the victim’s family.
Supreme Court of India (Photo: IANS/File)
The Supreme Court on Monday accepted the plea of the victim’s lawyer and transferred the Kathua gangrape and murder case to Pathankot.
In addition, the top court has directed that the trial in Kathua case should be held in-camera. The court has ordered fast-track trial in the Kathua case in which an 8-year-old was brutally raped in confinement and killed. The trial will be conducted on a day-to-day basis to avoid any delay.
The apex court has said the trial would be in accordance with provisions of Ranbir Penal Code, applicable in Jammu and Kashmir. The court added that the trial in the case must be fair to accused as well as the victim’s family.
Advertisement
Also Read: Our real concern is to see fair trial in Kathua rape-murder case: Supreme Court
On 27 April, senior advocate Indira Jaising, who appeared for the victim’s family, had asked for the case to be transferred to Chandigarh, citing incidents of obstruction to police personnel from discharging their duties by lawyers of the local court. She suggested Chandigarh due to its proximity to Kathua.
She said attempts were made to intimidate the presiding judge of the court and the crime branch officials were heckled by the lawyers, as was evident in the affidavit filed by the Jammu and Kashmir government.
On the same day, the court had stayed till May 7 the trial in the Kathua gangrape and murder case.
The child from a minority nomadic community had disappeared from near her home in a village near Kathua in Jammu region on January 10. Her body was found in the same area a week later.
Last month, the apex court had said it would transfer the Kathua gangrape and murder case from the local court in Jammu and Kashmir in the “slightest possibility” of lack of fair trial, saying the “real concern” was to hold proper prosecution.
The eight-year-old’s father had moved the apex court earlier, apprehending threat to the family, a friend and their lawyer Rajawat.
(With agency inputs)
Advertisement
