Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

Brajesh Thakur, during his appeal challenging his conviction before the Delhi High Court, on Tuesday, stated "The statements made by the minor victims are improved, and that there was no investigation or substantial evidence to support them". Brajesh Thakur was sentenced to life imprisonment for sexually assaulting multiple minor girls in a shelter home in Muzaffarpur,

Earlier, in January 2020, the Special POSCO court (Saket) pronounced the sentence after finding him guilty of several offences, including aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, as well as rape and gang-rape under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).  

The bench presided over by Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Amit Sharma while hearing the appeal filed by Thakur against his conviction reviewed the victim testimonies presented by Senior Advocate Pramod Kumar Dubey, appearing for Brajesh Thakur. 

In his appeal, Senior Advocate Pramod Kumar Dubey argued that the three-month gap between the incident and the victims’ statements raises suspicion about their credibility. He further denied the rape allegations and reiterated that the testimonies of the minor victims cannot be relied upon as they are not of 'sterling quality' because they were improved. 

Referring to the medical evidence, the Senior advocate stated that the medical reports do not indicate any sexual act and that the victims' testimonies are inconsistent with the medical record. 

However, the same bench on 12th September criticized Thakur and remarked, “He turned a blind eye to everything". While reviewing the medical report of minor girls, the bench, said, "Even if we presume there may not be perfect evidence in the case of one or two victims, The fact remains that this man completely turned a blind eye to everything that happened; the victim is saying so clearly that this man (mamu) raped her, who was Brajesh Thakur's employee, and the 'balika grah' was run by him?”  

Considering the bench’s remark, the Senior Advocate Pramod Kumar Dubey, said the ‘Balika grah’ was managed by the government, not Thakur. He said, ''the learned trial judge introduced a new jurisprudence in order to convict Thakur."  

Previously, on July 22, 2022, the Delhi High Court’s division bench led by Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar issued notice to the CBI. Senior Advocate Pramod Dubey alleged that the trial was conducted in a "hurried manner" by the special judge (POCSO), which was a flagrant violation of Thakur’s right to a free and fair trial as guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. 

Let us take a brief look into the timeline of the case:   

January 20, 2020: The Saket Court's bench presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Kulshreshtha sentenced Thakur to life imprisonment for sexually and physically assaulting several girls in the shelter home.  

August 2, 2018: The Supreme Court took suo moto cognizance of the matter and transferred the case from Bihar to the POCSO court at the Saket district court complex in Delhi. 

July 28, 2018: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) took over the probe. After conducting a thorough inquiry, the CBI filed a chargesheet against 20 accused individuals. 

February 2018: The Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) submitted its audit report highlighting incidents of sexual assault on minor girls in Muzaffarpur shelter home to Bihar's Social Welfare department. 

 
Case Title: Brajesh Kumar Thakur v State [CRL.A.-364/2020]

[Inputs: India Today]