Childhood Broken: Family waiting for justice 8 years after child was sexually abused | Being raped

Imperfect survivors in an imperfect system

Rakhi and Madhav’s antagonism is also spread through phone calls – made incessantly to whoever they consider “superior”.

ASI Parvati, for example, was the investigating officer of the case when the FIR was filed in 2018. Rakhi, Madhav and the children seemed to take him immediately, and he was going home to be transferred until he was transferred to Netaji Subhash Police Station four years ago.

After that, the officer had to politely explain to them that he had been transferred, that the investigation was over and that he could get the facts from their lawyers.

However, until ASI Parvati left, she was at every function that Rakhi and Madhav had, usually the children’s birthday parties.

Parvati said she regretted not seeing the couple in the last four years. Given their long wait for a legal resolution, he said he is confident that justice is being served.

“I’m sure there will be punishment – perhaps considering that the accused has already spent seven years in prison,” he said.

As an IO, ASI Parvati will be the last police witness to testify and should, as per the usual practice, be the last witness for the prosecution. The civil case against Suraj for Pia’s rape continues: hearings are held every three months or so, with medical and police witnesses testifying.

If convicted of molesting a child under the age of 16, Suraj strength he faces a minimum of 20 years in prison and up to life (reduced), as well as a fine to pay for Pia’s medical expenses and rehabilitation.

Pia’s parents are no longer going to court, because they no longer need to testify. Instead, he visits with a group of prosecutors after each court day.

Ashish Kumar, head of Legal Interventions at HAQ, an NGO that is helping the family in the case, said Parvati had missed her final decisions. But due to recent developments in the case, he thinks he will be called again in the future.

“The police made a mistake in collecting the evidence provided by the security forces,” he said.

“The errors have set us back. The IO should be called in the future, when these issues are addressed.”

The POCSO mandates that each state government, in consultation with the chief justice of the state high court, appoints “Special Courts” for speedy trial of cases. Each district must have one District Court designated as a Special Court to hear cases “in camera” – in closed chambers that protect the dignity and privacy of children.

Among other provisions, it mandates a child-friendly environment. Another important requirement, under Section 35 (2), Chapter VIII of the POCSO Act, is that the Special Court “shall complete the trial, as far as possible, within one year from the date of cognizance of the offence.”

For Pia, this did not happen.

Kumar criticizes the “dependency” of cases, the delay in cases being opened.

“Even if you insist on an early date, judges often write that, because of the high level of trust, they don’t want to give short (early) dates,” he said.

Delays due to “indifference to cases”, he said, are also common, referring to the use of words to criticize victims in court or trivialize sexual violence.

“As a juvenile justice attorney, I have children who have been in prison for years while the cases are ongoing,” he asked, saying that the reason they created the special courts is to ensure that justice is done quickly and that there is a child-friendly environment.

“If we run them like regular courts, then they will fail in their purpose,” he added.

This is also a reasonable concern for the accused. Suraj, who is accused of raping Pia, has been in prison for eight years without conviction.

As ASI (now retired) Parvati once did, Kumar and his small team of forensic experts receive frequent calls and WhatsApp messages from Rakhi and Madhav.

Most of the time, this connection involves conflicts with their lower-class neighbors – their relatives are the ones who support Suraj’s innocence. Over the past eight years, their relatives have insisted that the case has defamed their family and that, by continuing to prosecute their family members instead of negotiating a settlement in court, Rakhi and Madhav have ended their relationship.

Recently, there has been some debate about whether family members can participate in partnerships. A similar civil dispute has taken place in court between the couple over land sharing. Raj Kataria, who was the public prosecutor, said that this led the POCSO court to say that the local police had installed CCTV cameras at the entrance of Rakhi and Madhav.

The pair are often seen cross-legged and staring at a large window that sends out dirty images of the canals outside. He analyzes passing statistics with something akin to paranoia. I saw them switching the television monitor, on the remote tap, between the “regular” cable and their court-ordered CCTV.

Family fights continued, resulting in frequent calls to the police.

“(Station House Officer) asks me what to do,” Kumar said. “Sometimes, the argument is that the family will turn off the water engine at 2 am, which makes them (Rakhi and Madhav) dry,” he says. “There’s not much we can do, other than encourage them to move.”

Officials have sent social workers to the family, offering to help them look for another house next door.

“The property is shared by the floor, and their entry and exit intersect – of course, there will be a conflict,” Kumar said.

But Rakhi and Madhav never agreed to move.