Ajmer rape case

In 1992, the Ajmer Serial Gang Rape & Blackmailing Case was one of India's biggest cases of coerced sexual exploitation. The incidents occurred in Ajmer, a city in the state of Rajasthan. The scandal involved hundreds of young girls, some college students some still in schools. The news of the scandal broke after a local paper, ‘Navjyoti’ published some nude images and a story which spoke about school students being blackmailed by local gangs.

The investigation of the case was stalled by police under political pressure as the main accused, Farooq Chishtee was president of the Ajmer Indian Youth Congress. Eventually, 18 serial offenders were charged in the court. Eight were convicted for life and 4 among them were later acquitted in 2001.

"The accused were in a position of influence, both socially and financially, and that made it even more difficult to persuade the girls to come forward and depose," says retired Rajasthan D.G.P. Omendra Bhardwaj, who was then posted as the deputy inspector general of police, Ajmer. Supreme Court noted in this case, "Unfortunately many of the victims who appeared as witnesses turned hostile and one can appreciate the reason why they did not want to depose against the appellants as that would have exposed them as well, and would have adversely affected their future life." The case has been compared to the Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal.

Incident

The blackmail operation was discovered to be a chain of serial offenders. A specific group of local influential men were targeting young girls. First, Farooq Chistee trapped one of the girls from Sophia Senior Secondary school, Ajmer and took obscene photos of her. Then the accused blackmailed the girl into familiarising them to her classmates and friends. Eventually, other girls would be raped, sexually exploited and have their pictures taken at a farmhouse. The cycle continued so forth. The gang continued to expand its operations and victimise an increasing number of girls. They photographed the girls in compromising positions, using the images to exploit the victims.

In 1992, the Ajmer assault case was probably the greatest instance of forced sexual abuse. Most blamed were from Ajmer Dargah for Moinuddin Chishti. The shakedown activity was found to be a chain of chronic wrongdoers. A particular gathering of neighborhood powerful men were focusing on little youngsters. First Farooq Chisti caught one of the young ladies from Sophia Senior Optional school, Ajmer and took foul photographs of her. At that point the denounced extorted the young lady into family emerging them to her cohorts and companions. At last, different young ladies would be assaulted, explicitly misused and have their photos taken at a farmhouse. The pack kept on extending its activities and casualty an expanding number of young ladies. They shot the young ladies in trading off positions, utilizing the pictures to misuse the people in question. The manager of Navjyoti, Deenbandhu Chaudhary, had conceded that the neighborhood law authorization specialists knew about the outrage nearly since a year prior to the story broke, yet they permitted the nearby lawmakers to slow down the examinations. At long last, the police stopped a FIR against eight of the denounced. Further examinations prompted 18 men altogether being charged and pressures ran intense in the town for a few days. Individuals rampaged to dissent and public strain developed. A three-day bandh was noticed and much ensuing information on the far reaching abuse and coercion began coming in. Resigned Rajasthan DGP Omendra Bhardwaj, who was the delegate monitor general of police in Ajmer around then, expressed that the social and monetary privileged of the charged prevented a lot more casualties from approaching. Another terrible acknowledgment was that a large number of the people in question, being youthful and defenseless, had effectively ended it all. What followed next was another adventure of political impact and regulatory ineptitude. The case is still a long way from being shut. Numerous casualties who should be observers, turned unfriendly. The smell of social shame and ostracisation was terrible to such an extent that young ladies of the town were summed up as being survivors of the group. The quantity of casualties was accepted to be a few hundred. A couple of the casualties approached. The circumstance was awful to the point that planned grooms, who should wed young ladies from Ajmer, would come to workplaces of papers, attempting to see whether the young lady they planned to wed was one of them. Anant Bhatnagar, state general secretary, Individuals' Association for Common Freedoms and an inhabitant of Ajmer said that individuals used to say if the young lady was from Ajmer, they would have to discover what sort of young lady she was. Charged blamed : Just for 18 denounced accused of kidnapping and assault were Muslims, essentially from the tribe of guardians of sufi holy place of Ajmer Sharif Dargah of Moinuddin Chishti. Principle blamed Farooq Chishty was president for the Ajmer Youth Congress. Nafis Chishty was the VP of Ajmer Indian Public Congress (INC) and Anwar Chishty was the joint secretary of INC. Moijullah pseudonym Puttan, Ishrat Ali, Anwar Chishty and Shamshuddin false name Meradona were additionally condemned by the court. Absconder Suhail Chishty covered up for a very long time before gave up 26 years after the fact. Absconder Salim Chishty was captured in 2012. Another fundamental denounced, Alamas, is as yet slipping off. Preliminary: As indicated by the police and ladies centered NGOs, it was hard to fabricate a body of evidence against the culprits, as most casualties were hesitant to approach. Notwithstanding, the photos and recordings used to extort the casualties distinguished the denounced and assemble the body of evidence against them. Thirty casualties were distinguished in the examinations; out of these, just around twelve recorded cases, and ten later retreated. Just two casualties sought after the case. Of the 18 denounced that were accused of kidnapping and assault under the Indian Reformatory Code and Revolting Portrayal of Ladies (denial), one has since ended it all. In 2013, the Rajasthan High Court maintained the choice however it diminished the time of the sentence from life detainment to the time frame previously served by him. In 2004, the High Court excused the two bids documented by the state, just as the convicts. A seat including Equity N. Santosh Hegde and Equity BP Singh said having respect to current realities and conditions of the case, we are of the view that the closures of equity would be met if the sentence is diminished to ten years thorough detainment. The majority of the casualties were from wealthy families and some of them were girls of IAS and IPS officials. The most upsetting piece of the terrible case has been the peaceful enduring of the people in question. After the assault, most casualties experienced badgering and dangers, with no help from society or their families. As indicated by police examinations, around 6 casualties supposedly ended it all. Ajmer Mahila Samooh, who attempted to take up the casualty's motivation, pulled out in the wake of accepting dangers. Modest sensationalist newspapers were a significant sensation in Ajmer around then. As though the mass misuse of many young ladies was not a sufficient hit to the town's heart, numerous casualties were even supposedly extorted further by these sensationalist newspapers and neighborhood papers. They approached the express pictures of the young ladies, and the proprietors and distributers looked for cash from the groups of the young ladies to keep them covered up. can't be reliant on the social and the monetary status of the person in question or the charged and the race, rank, statement of faith of the blamed can't be thought about. Joshi governed, Corruption of their character is reflected from the way that the charged delighted in the demonstration. They didn't carry out the wrongdoing under any coercion or impulse. They had appreciated the demonstration. This was a case, where the denounced were totally unmerited. The adjudicator additionally rubbished the safeguard's cases that the casualties had endured no actual wounds. The adjudicator question whether such entries caused it to seem like the blamed had done some foundation by letting her leave healthy. The adjudicator further controlled, This court had a chance to comprehend the injury as she reviewed them at the hour of her declaration in the court.

Investigation

The editor of Navjyoti, Deenbandhu Chaudhary, had admitted that the local law enforcement authorities were aware of the scandal almost since a year before the story broke, but they allowed the local politicians to stall the investigations.

Chaudhary stated that finally, they decided to go ahead with the story because that seemed to be the only way to prod the local administration into action. Finally, the police lodged an FIR against eight of the accused. Further investigations led to 18 men in total being charged and tensions ran high in the town for several days.

People took to the streets to protest and communal tension grew. A three-day bandh was observed and much subsequent news of the widespread exploitation and blackmail started coming in. Retired Rajasthan DGP Omendra Bhardwaj, who was the deputy inspector general of police in Ajmer at that time stated that the social and financial aristocracy of the accused stopped many more victims from coming forward. Another grim realisation was that many of the victims, being young and vulnerable, had already committed suicide.

What followed next was another saga of political influence and administrative incompetence. The case is still far from being closed. Many victims who were supposed to be witnesses, turned hostile. The stink of social stigma and ostracisation was so bad that girls of the town were generalised as being victims of the gang. The number of victims was believed to be several hundred.

Only a few of the victims came forward. The situation was so bad that prospective grooms, who were supposed to marry girls from Ajmer, would come to offices of newspapers, trying to find out if the girl they were going to marry was one of ‘them’. Anant Bhatnagar, state general secretary, People’s Union for Civil Liberties and a resident of Ajmer said that people used to say if the girl was from Ajmer, they would need to find out what kind of girl she was.

The Rajasthan police's Special Operations Group (SOG) arrested Saiyed Saleem Chishtee, 42, one of the accused from Khalid Mohalla in Ajmer town on 04 January 2012.

Charged accused

All of 18 accused charged with abduction and gang rape belonged to the clan of caretakers of sufi shrine of Ajmer Sharif Dargah of Moinuddin Chishti. Main accused Farooq Chishtee was president of the Ajmer Youth Congress. Nafis Chishtee was the vice-president of Ajmer Indian National Congress and Anwar Chishtee was the joint secretary of Ajmer Indian National Congress. Moijullah alias Puttan, Ishrat Ali, Anwar Chishtee and Shamshuddin alias Meradona were also sentenced by the court. Absconder Suhail Chishtee hid for 26 years before surrendered 26 years later. Absconder Salim Chishtee was arrested in 2012. Another main accused, Alamas, is still absconding.

Trial

According to the police and women-focused NGOs, it was difficult to build a case against the perpetrators, as most victims were reluctant to come forward. However, the photographs and videos used to blackmail the victims helped identify the accused and build the case against them.

Thirty victims were identified in the investigations; out of these, only about a dozen filed cases, and ten later backed out. Only two victims pursued the case. Of the 18 accused who were charged with abduction and gang-rape under the Indian Penal Code and Indecent Representation of Women (prohibition), one has since committed suicide. In 2013, the Rajasthan High Court upheld the decision though it reduced the period of the sentence from life imprisonment to the period already served by him.

In 2004, the Supreme Court dismissed both appeals filed by the state, as well as the convicts. A bench comprising Justice N. Santosh Hegde and Justice BP Singh said "having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the sentence is reduced to ten years rigorous imprisonment.

Victims

Most of the victims were from well to do families and some of them were daughters of IAS and IPS officers. The most disturbing part of the horrific case has been the quiet suffering of the victims. After the rape, most victims experienced harassment and threats, with no support from society or their families. According to police investigations, about 6 victims allegedly committed suicide. Ajmer Mahila Samooh, who tried to take up the victim's cause, withdrew after receiving threats. Small-time tabloids were quite a sensation in Ajmer at that time. As if the mass exploitation of hundreds of girls was not enough of a blow to the town’s conscience, many victims were even allegedly blackmailed further by these tabloids and local papers. They had access to the explicit images of the girls, and the owners and publishers sought money from the families of the girls to keep them hidden.

Aftermath

The incident shocked the entire country. People took to the streets to protest and communal tension grew. A three-day bandh was observed and much subsequent news of the widespread exploitation and blackmail started coming in. The police were also criticised for not acting even after having information about the ongoing sexual abuses. It had also stalled the case because the local politicians warned action against the accused would lead to massive communal tension.

Musabbir Hussain, joint secretary of the Anjuman Committee which oversees the Ajmer Dargah, told Indian Express "It’s a case that nobody in Ajmer wants to talk about because of the nature of the crime. It’s a blot on our city’s history."

See also

• Rape in India
• List of scandals in India

References

Sources

• "The Telegraph - Calcutta : Nation". Telegraphindia.com. 3 February 2004. Retrieved 13 May 2013.