Ayesha Meera rape case: Hyderabad High Court dismayed by destruction of evidence
HYDERABAD: In a new twist in the sensational Ayesha Meera rape and murder case of 2007, a division bench of the Hyderabad High Court on Friday said that it would examine the issue of entrusting the case investigation to the CBI. Accordingly, it impleaded the CBI as a respondent and issued notice to it. If the facts of the case were not brought out, people would lose confidence in the judiciary, it warned.
Besides, the bench took a serious view of the destruction of objects like clothes and other materials of Ayesha which were seized by the police from the scene of offence. It directed the registrar-general to have a detailed enquiry to know the real culprits responsible for the destruction even before pronouncement of verdict by the High Court on the appeal earlier filed by P Satyam Babu against the order of a lower court. The bench made it clear to the registrar-general that he could conduct enquiry against any official and submit a report to the court within four weeks.
The bench of Chief Justice TBN Radhakrishnan and Justice SV Bhatt passed this order on a petition filed by Syed Iqbal Basha and Shamshad Begum, parents of Ayesha, seeking re-investigation into the case.
On March 31, 2017, the High Court acquitted Pidathala Satyam Babu of the charges of murdering the victim in her hostel on December 26, 2007. The murder triggered public outrage, prompting the police to initiate action. Satyam Babu’s arrest infuriated the public, apart from Ayesha’s family members, who suspected the role of bigwigs. While setting aside the lower court’s order of September 29, 2009, the court directed the government to pay Rs1 lakh in costs to Satyam Babu who had already served eight years in prison.
In January, the bench ordered the SIT to investigate the murder afresh and said the fresh probe would be monitored by the court. The SIT should complete the investigation expeditiously and submit report. Besides, the court ordered the state government to take disciplinary action against the then erring officers who had probed the case earlier.
When the matter came up for hearing on Friday, AP’s special counsel Krishna Prakash, appearing for SIT, said that they came to know about destruction of the material objects when a petition was filed before the lower court. Wondering at this submission, the bench said the material objects would play a key role in cracking the case and said the Court would find out those responsible for destruction of the case records. Adjourning the case, it directed the registrar-general to have a detailed inquiry into the issue and submit a report in four weeks.