Prasagraj: Taking a serious note that was not delivered by the final progress report in the gang rape case and the murder of a small girl of Chitrakoot Regency, the High Court of Allahabad on Monday called the Director General of CB-CID on Wednesday, January 18.
Hearing the writing petition submitted by one Shiv Vijay, a division bench consisting of justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Deepak Verma was observed, “We did not propose to give further time because almost ten months had passed because the problem was handed over to CB-CID.
For inquiry 2020.
A case below section 376D (Gang Rape), 302 (murder), section 8 prevention of children from pacso sexual violations acting at the police station – Bahilpurwa in Chitrakoot Regency.
Then, the applicant filed a direct petition that alleged that the investigation was not well done by civilian police.
The court wasted a direct petition, directed the relevant authority to ensure that the right investigation was carried out and if not, took the improvement step.
Furthermore, the state government transferred investigations to CB-CID on April 16, 2021 and asked the Director General, CB-CID, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow to submit a final progress report within six weeks.
Advice for the Petitioner, RPL Srivastava believes that there are no actions taken against the defendant, even though they are a specific accusation of them.
They have not been arrested so far.
Instead, it was the first informant to be harassed by the police authority.
The view from the order was passed by the state government on April 16, 2021.on Monday, when the case was taken, the state counsel was looking for more time.
Courts, while declining to provide further time observed, “This court found that this problem was transferred to CB-CID on April 16, 2021 provided that the final progress report was submitted within six weeks.
The same thing has not been done and today , delays are being sought by the addition of government advocates (AGA) on the request that the DNA report is awaited from the Forensic Laboratory.
In this case, the conflict of advice for the applicant is that there were no actions taken against the defendant, even though they were specific charges of them.
They have not been arrested And vice versa, it was the first informant to be harassed by the police authority.
“