Supreme Court Stays Trial In Rabia Saifi Murder Case, Seeks Authorities' Response On Father's Plea For CBI Probe Into Conspiracy

Debby Jain

26 Nov 2024 4:49 PM IST

  • Supreme Court Stays Trial In Rabia Saifi Murder Case, Seeks Authorities Response On Fathers Plea For CBI Probe Into Conspiracy
    Listen to this Article

    On hearing her father's plea to transfer the case to CBI, the Supreme Court yesterday stayed the trial in the murder case of Rabia Saifi, a 21-year-old Civil Defense volunteer with the Delhi government, who was stabbed to death in August, 2021.

    A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B Varale passed the order, while issuing notice to the Haryana Police, on a petition filed by Rabia's father-Sameed Ahmad, against an order dated 03.07.2024 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court declining to transfer the case to CBI (or any other independent agency).

    Sameed Ahmad had approached the High Court alleging that his daughter was murdered as part of a larger conspiracy to suppress the factum of indulgence of civil defence personnel of the Government of NCT of Delhi in rampant corruption under the garb of enforcing COVID appropriate behaviour amongst the public.

    "The 21 years old deceased, who had joined the force merely a few months prior to her murder, had become privy to the rampant corruption and unlawful gratification and enrichment of senior officials in her Department. Her superior, Mr. Ravinder Mehra, DANICS, was arrested by the Delhi Police in connection with the above referred activities just a day prior to her disappearance from her Office at the Collectorate, Amar Colony, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi" his plea stated.

    Further, it was highlighted that Rabia's senior, Ravinder Mehra, DANICS, was arrested by the Delhi Police in connection with the above-referred activities just a day prior to her disappearance from her office at District Magistrate, Amar Colony, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi.

    The High Court issued notice on the petition and heard the matter on a couple of occasions, having stayed the trial. But eventually, vide the impugned order, the plea to transfer the case to CBI was dismissed, noting that the trial Court had framed charges. The High Court further directed that the trial be endeavored to be completed within a year.

    What does the petition say?

    The petition states that Rabia's body was shown to have been recovered from Haryana and an FIR registered based on fabricated facts to mislead the investigation and conceal the conspiracy behind her murder.

    The High Court order is called into question, pointing out that the charges had been framed way back in 2022 and thereafter, the High Court kept the trial in abeyance and passed significant orders. As such, the petition ought not to have been dismissed as infructuous on the ground that the charges had been framed.

    It is further asserted that Constitutional Courts have power to order further investigation, de novo investigation or re-investigation, regardless of whether charges have been framed or not.

    With regard to the state police investigation, the petitioner claims that the mobile phones of Rabia and the accused were stated to have been sent for forensic analysis. However, the report has not been received yet. "This Report has remained pending for the entire duration of the adjudication of the Petition by the Hon'ble High Court", the petition avers.

    Background

    Rabia Saifi (21) was allegedly stabbed to death on August 26, 2021. As reported by NewsLaundry, according to the post-mortem report, Rabia was repeatedly stabbed and her private parts were brutally crushed.

    On August 27, a 23-year-old man named Mohammad Nizamuddin surrendered at the Kalindi Kunj police station and claimed responsibility for Rabia's murder.

    In 2022, the Trial Court framed charges against Mohd. Nizamuddin and one Chand Mohammad under Sections 364, 302 read with Section 120B of the IPC. As against Mohd. Nizamuddin, further charges were framed under Sections 404, 201 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

    Appearance: Advocates Mehmood Pracha and Jatin Bhatt; Advocate-on-Record RHA Sikander

    Case Title: SAMEED AHMAD vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA, Diary No.48472/2024

    Click Here To Read/Download Order

    Next Story