In a stern admonition, the Supreme Court of India reprimanded the Uttar Pradesh government for its lax approach in complying with a crucial court order concerning the examination of a minor victim in a sexual assault case. The apex court, presided over by Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, emphasized that their orders are not issued “just for fun” and demanded strict adherence within a set deadline.
During the hearing, which took place on Wednesday, the court dealt with a bail application from a man accused of raping a minor girl. The justices expressed their frustration with the frequent casual handling of court orders by state representatives. “We are seeing it happening day in and day out… every state counsel is taking our orders casually,” Justice Amanullah remarked, indicating the court’s diminishing tolerance for such negligence.
Senior Advocate Garima Prasad, representing the Uttar Pradesh government, initially requested an adjournment, citing a condolence meeting at the trial court which prevented the recording of the victim’s evidence. However, the bench criticized this justification as overly casual, especially since the order to examine the victim was labeled as “mandatory.” The justices warned that failure to comply within one week could lead to the summoning of the state’s home secretary.
The court also pointed out the responsibility of the state’s counsel to proactively seek extensions for compliance deadlines when genuinely needed, rather than ignoring the court’s directives. “Be very careful in court. Now we are going to take serious note of this,” the bench cautioned Prasad, while granting an additional week to fulfill the order.
Also Read
The accused in the case is facing charges of rape and criminal intimidation of the 16-year-old victim, following a complaint filed on September 19, 2023. The allegation details repeated sexual assaults over a six-month period. Despite the gravity of the case, delays in examining the victim and other witnesses have marred the judicial process, leading to the Supreme Court’s direct intervention in November last year, setting a deadline for the victim’s examination by June 30.
