The Crime Branch (CB) will investigate whether the complainant in the sensational Protection of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act registered against a 54-year-old self-styled sanyasi had come under any ‘duress or extraneous influence’ to ‘rescind’ her statement.
The original police case was that the 23-year-old woman had slashed the genitals of the accused, Gangesananda, alias Hari, at her house on May 21 to halt ‘years of sexual abuse.’
The police claimed the victim had acted in ‘self-defence.’ Hence, no case was registered against the woman despite the grievous injury suffered by the ‘sanyasi’ who was a regular at her house since 2008. A week later, the woman executed a surprising ‘volte-face’ on her statement, dashing the police version that she had acted in self-defence.
The ‘victim’ accused the police of wrongly portraying the sanyasi, a ‘father figure,’ as her sexual aggressor and doctoring her statement.
She also suggested that a provocateur, an acquaintance of hers, had instigated the attack to punish the ‘sanyasi’ for his role in the 2008 agitation to regain the birth place of Chattambi Swami, a 19th century seer, from the possession of a ranking police official.
The controversial ‘turn about’ and the circumstances that impelled it, if any, are now part of the unfolding Crime Branch investigation.
The agency will also examine whether the ‘victim’ was professionally counselled at the station. The law mandated such a measure to ease the mental trauma of victims to empower them to give lucid statement and prepare for medical examination.
The police had come under severe criticism for not registering an FIR against the woman on the ‘tenuous’ ground that she had claimed self-defence under what was an attempt to murder charge.
The Crime Branch might review the decision after seeking legal opinion. Meanwhile, the ‘victim’ visited her alleged ‘aggressor’ at the hospital where he is being held as a remand prisoner.
The police have deployed two plainclothesmen to ‘protect’ her after the ‘victim’ complained of threat from the ‘instigator’ of the crime.
