SIT in a quandary over Ramesh Jarkiholi case

The Special Investigation Team (SIT) has nearly accomplished its probe into the alleged rape case in opposition to former BJP Minister Ramesh Jarkiholi. However, sources declare that saddled with “weak” and infrequently contradictory proof, the SIT has been but to conclude its findings.

The probe was launched after a CD was launched in March with clips of Jarkiholi allegedly abusing a lady and searching for sexual favours from her in return for a authorities job. The SIT was shaped based mostly on the grievance by the girl in the video, whilst Mr. Jarkiholi filed a case in opposition to unidentified people for making an attempt to blackmail and extort cash utilizing the video.

Senior officers informed The Puucho that there was “insufficient evidence” to prosecute Mr. Jarkiholi for rape in the case. However, the authorized opinion is split over his culpability below Section 376C of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalises sexual activity by a particular person in authority. Mr. Jarkiholi has not been given a “clean chit” but. The SIT might submit a report of all the target findings of the probe to the federal government, sources mentioned.

The Opposition Congress has been mounting strain on the SIT, accusing it of delaying the probe. However, Home Minister Basavaraj Bommai has repeatedly claimed the SIT has been given full independence and there was no interference in the probe. Any doable “clean chit” to Mr. Jarkiholi is predicted to create a political storm.

“The alleged rape happened in February and it was two months later that the woman was subjected to a medical examination and a spot mahazar was conducted. There was no evidence recovered from either exercise,” a senior official mentioned.

Ideally, the girl’s assertion is adequate proof. However, in this case, the proof factors to a “honey trap”, the official mentioned. Recently, Mr. Jarkiholi additionally reportedly modified his earlier stance and agreed that he had consensual intercourse with the girl and the video was real, however was used to extort cash from him.

“The video in the public domain is only a small portion of the raw footage, which shows that the sexual act was consensual. It has some evidence indicating that it may have been a case of honey trap,” the official mentioned. “Moreover, the woman had made several deliberate attempts to mask her identity while approaching Mr. Jarkiholi. She claimed to be working at a drone firm and approached him to seek permission to shoot dams in the State while she was working at a real estate firm and had no work shooting dams,” a supply mentioned.

However, Mr. Jarkiholi has been booked below Section 376C of the IPC. Legal opinion is split over whether or not he’s culpable below that specific part even when the sexual act was consensual.