In response to growing complexities and emerging questions surrounding the Varanasi gang-rape case, an eight-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) was constituted on Thursday to ensure a thorough and impartial inquiry, officials confirmed.
The move came shortly after the families of the arrested accused submitted a formal application to the police, raising several concerns over the allegations made by the 19-year-old complainant and urging a fair and transparent investigation.
The SIT was formed under the directive of Varanasi Police Commissioner Mohit Agarwal, who emphasized that the panel’s primary responsibility would be to guarantee the integrity of the investigation, ensuring no innocent person is wrongfully implicated as the case unfolds.
So far, the police have arrested 14 individuals in connection with the case. The newly formed SIT will be headed by Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Pramod Kumar.
Other members include Additional Deputy Commissioners of Police (ADCPs) Shruti Srivastava and Neetu, Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Vidhush Saxena, along with four inspectors of the Varanasi police.
In an official statement, the Varanasi Police clarified that the SIT’s role would extend beyond verifying existing facts — the team would also review and assess any new information that surfaces during the probe.
Importantly, the statement noted that if additional suspects, not mentioned in the original First Information Report (FIR), are identified during the investigation, they will only be arrested upon formal recommendation by the SIT.
The case initially began when the complainant’s father lodged a missing person’s report on April 4, stating that his daughter had been untraceable since March 29. Later that same evening, police were able to locate the young woman at a friend’s residence.
The following day, accompanied by her parents, the teenager visited the local police station and filed a formal complaint, alleging that she had been drugged, held captive, and gang-raped over five days.
According to her statement, the accused took her to multiple locations across Varanasi, including a hotel and a café, where she was sexually assaulted by several individuals.
Acting on her complaint, police registered an FIR under charges of gang rape and criminal confinement, naming 12 individuals explicitly and listing 11 others as unidentified.
However, in a twist to the investigation, the families of the accused raised several critical questions in their application to the police, challenging the complainant’s narrative.
They questioned the timeline of events, particularly why her family waited until April 4 to file a missing person’s complaint despite her disappearance on March 29.
The families also raised concerns about why, upon being found at her friend’s house, the complainant did not immediately disclose the alleged sexual assault to either her friend or the police.
Further, the accused families highlighted that during the timeframe when the girl claimed she had been assaulted, she was seen staying twice at the same friend’s house without raising any alarms.
They pointed out the absence of visible injury marks on her body, which they argued was inconsistent with the gravity of the allegations, given her claim of being assaulted by as many as 23 individuals.
The letter submitted by the families also cited CCTV footage dated March 31, reportedly showing the complainant walking freely and cheerfully alongside three of the accused.
They further referenced several posts and photos that were uploaded to the girl’s Instagram account on April 2, where she appeared to be in good spirits, as additional evidence that seemed to contradict her claims.
The families also mentioned an Instagram message sent by the complainant to one of the accused on March 31, informing him that she would be meeting him at a café, further raising questions about the circumstances of the alleged assault.
Another point raised by the families was the complainant’s alleged failure to seek help or alert anyone at the hotels or cafés where she claimed to have been repeatedly assaulted.
They questioned why she willingly met some of the accused again on April 3, despite alleging that she had already been assaulted by them earlier.
Adding to the complexity, the police acknowledged that some individuals involved in the case have claimed the complainant was initially reluctant to return to her family even after being traced and recovered by the police.
The accused families also made a serious allegation, claiming that the complainant’s family had approached some of the accused demanding money and had threatened to implicate them in a false case if they did not comply.
They alleged that the FIR was the result of a premeditated attempt at blackmail and extortion.
The families further argued that the complainant’s parents were, in fact, aware of her whereabouts between March 29 and April 4, and that many of the accused had prior connections with her via Instagram.
When contacted for a statement, Police Commissioner Mohit Agarwal confirmed that the SIT would scrutinize the entire case, including the evidence against the 14 arrested individuals.
He also stated that DNA profiling was underway to match evidence and help establish the facts.
Sources added that the SIT will also investigate inconsistencies between the complainant’s FIR and her subsequent statement recorded before a magistrate, where reportedly some of the names included in the FIR were omitted.
Additionally, police confirmed that the complainant’s medical examination did not reveal any external injury marks at the time of the investigation.
As the SIT proceeds with its inquiry, the case continues to draw significant attention, with both sides offering conflicting versions of the events.
The investigation is expected to play a crucial role in separating fact from speculation and ensuring that justice is served, both for the complainant and for any of the accused who may have been falsely implicated.
