Updates on Rahul Rape case
NEW DELHI : Sukanya and her Mother had approached Human Rights Commision as well as Women Rights Commission in New Delhi in December 2006.
Its almost confirmed that Human Rights Officials took their complaint in a lighter vein and sent them off asking them to come back after they call for. They have asked for substantial evidence to prove their charges before going in for action. They complained that the police and local administration refused to take their complaint. Human rights was no different, they were more interested in sending them away. Surprisingly no medical examination was ordered by the Commission and no doctor or institution was willing to examine after it learnt the name of the accused.
Sukanya and her Mother had stated in their complaint to the human rights that no Doctor around Amethi or elsewhere were willing to examine her charges.
After meeting human rights Officials both Sukanya and her mother Sumithra Devi went to Womens Commission in New Delhi and lodged a complaint. The Woman rights also refused to come with a medical report and a police Complaint when Rahul was named as the main suspect. The women at Commission made her speak to Girija Vyas on telephone who was not available in office on that particular day. Girija Vyas who as soon as she heard their names said “I have already received a complaint from people from Amethi and Salman Khursheed that you (Sukanya and Your mother) were into flesh Tradeâ€. She alleged that sukanya and her mother used to induce poor girls and force them into prostitution.
She insisted them to first meet Salman Khursheed, if not she warned them with serious consequences if false charges are made against Rahul or making this issue public. She suggested them to also meet Ambika Soni if they are not comfortable meeting Salman Khursheed.Sukanya and her mother contacted Ambika Soni from the Womens Rights Office itself. She asked them to come and meet her at the earliest without even wasting anymore time. Sumithra Devi refused to go to her place saying she feared for her and her daughter’s life.
Amika Soni assured them that nothing will happen to them and she will send a vehicle to pick them. Before she could say anything both ladies left the premises immediately
It is also true that both women had meet Barkha Dutt on the same day and have gone underground since then maybe because they were threatened by Congressman or may be waiting for Presidential reply. Burkha Dutt had offered them some money as compensation. This is the also the last time she meet our contact person in New Delhi and is not available since then.
The President has referred the matter to Ministry of Home Affairs.
A reporter of CNN-IBN’s cameraman who recorded the statement of Sukanya and her mother has also gone missing since then.
Videographer Drupadh who took an interview of his sukanya and her mother on 4th noon on in unknown place on outskirts of Amethi. He had sent the cassette to his head office hoping to be an exclusive story on their channel. The Channel in turn kicked him out of the job and he has gone missing since then. Some Suspect that Drupadh can be a key witness and must still be possessing one set of copy of interview. Many people have gone missing after December 4 in Amethi and no police Cases are registered.
Welcome to Haindava Keralam! Register for Free or Login as a privileged HK member to enjoy auto-approval of your comments and to receive periodic updates.
Latest Articles from Bharath Focus
- Narendra Modi: The Architect of India’s Momentous Transformation
- Republic Day Tableaux & Regional Pride
- Tarun Vijay meets Governor Arif Khan on Adi Sankara birthplace
- SC-ST പോസ്റ്റ് മെട്രിക് സ്കോളർഷിപ്പിൽ 5 ഇരട്ടി വർദ്ധനവ്
- Treading the Middle-Path on Temple Management
- Taming the dragon-Part-3
- Taming the dragon- Part 2
- India- China trade wars on the cards? Well researched blog on Indian govt.’s proposed plan to tax 371 Chinese goods
- Before removing the idols, I should be removed; Two Kerala faces we should never forget
- The Unseen Unheard Victims of Article 35(A)
Responses