2 months on, Shahdara rape survivor says cops ‘could’ve stopped it if they listened to prior complaints’

On January 26, Nitya*, 20, was beaten, tonsured, allegedly gangraped and paraded in public, with a blackened face and a garland of shoes. Within a week, police held 20 persons, including four juveniles.

But for Nitya, who now leads a quiet and isolated life with her husband and three-year-old son, the police could have “stopped this if they had paid attention to us earlier”.

The days seem weary. “I don’t realise when it is night or day. I sleep a lot. I can barely do any housework. I don’t even feel like looking after my son anymore. I feel ashamed to even say that…Sometimes my son runs his hand over my tonsured head and asks me ‘mama mama, I saw everything. Those people who beat you up, will they come back?’”

Nitya’s son and 18-year-old sister Aditi* saw the assault. Despite two complaints – underlining a threat on January 20 and November 12 last year – the police did not register any FIR until the incident on January 26.

‘Police could have stopped this’

The violence can be traced back to November last year when Ayush Nahariya, a relative of the accused, died by suicide. According to neighbours and Aditi, Ayush had been “in love” with Nitya and had decided to commit suicide as “his love remained unrequited”. Ever since Ayush’s death, his family would blame and threaten Nitya’s family, especially her, said Aditi.

On November 12 last year, the day Ayush had committed suicide, Nitya alleged that the accused’s family had gone to her in-laws’ house, pelted stones on the window, and threatened to kill her. “I was so scared. They were trying to blame me for his death,” said Nitya, who was living with her husband and in-laws at that time.

Later that night, Nitya and her husband allegedly went to Vivek Vihar police station. “Police told us that they can’t write our complaint since we don’t live under their jurisdiction and we should go to Seemapuri police station,” alleged her husband.

Nitya submitted a complaint at Seemapuri police station. Nitya’s husband alleged that when the police contacted the accused, they “refused to even come to the police station”.

“The police never filed an FIR back then. Instead they told me to go away somewhere until the situation calmed down. And two months later, the same people gangraped me. If the police wanted they could have stopped this from happening,” alleged Nitya.

Due to increased threats after Ayush’s death, Nitya, her husband and their child moved away from their in-laws’ place to another house where they now live.

The second complaint was filed on January 20, six days before the incident, by Nitya’ sister Aditi – in the days before this complaint, Aditi had been beaten, their aunt had been assaulted and their father’s auto was burnt down by the accused. Aditi claimed that her complaint stated, “They threaten to kill me... I am helpless, sir, I need your help.”

Police registered an FIR only after Nitya had been attacked.

Asked about the delay, Shahdara DCP (crime) R Sathiyasundaram said, “What can I say now? It was a delay from our end. The SHO should have registered an FIR.”

Was the SHO suspended? “No, but we took internal departmental action,” said the DCP, refusing to divulge the details.

The DCP confirmed that while another complaint was filed in November, it was never registered as an FIR. Why? “FIR was not necessary. It was a non-cognizable offense. She was saying that they threatened her so we told her we will take preventive action,” he said.

The DCP referred to section 150 of CrPC, which states that whenever a police officer receives information regarding a potential design to commit a cognizable offense, the information has to be communicated to a higher authority who can deal with preventing the crime. “We informed the magistrate…If the magistrate had directed us to investigate, we would have.”

However, Nipun Katyal, a criminal lawyer, said, “In light of Lalita Kumari guidelines issued by the Supreme Court, the police could have registered an FIR instead of critically examining the victim’s allegations”. He said that a case like Nitya’s – where she is alleging a threat to her life – could be under section 386 IPC, which reads “extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt”. “This sort of extortion is a cognizable offense and merits the registration of an FIR.”

In her complaint, Nitya had alleged that “Ayush’s family are trying to blame me for his death and that they are threatening to kill me. I wanted protection and I wanted the police to register an FIR.”

Before and after

When Nitya was being publicly paraded, she was rescued by the police who Aditi managed to call from a neighbour’s phone. She was then taken to a safehouse where she was made to live away from her family for 10 days. “I couldn’t understand what was happening. I wanted to go home to my family, to my son, but the police told me that it was not safe for me to go back and that I should wait for a few days.”

Her husband visited her almost everyday, her grandparents met her a few times, she remembers talking to a therapist and being given medication, but those 10 days are still a blur for Nitya – whose sharpest memory is being asked if she would like her son to come stay with her. “I said no…It was no place for a child and I was so broken that I wouldn’t have been able to play with him.”

“Everyday I would ask the people there when I could go home, and they kept saying ‘one more day’, till 10 days were over. But…they treated me kindly and I did feel taken care of.”

The last few years have not been easy for Nitya and Aditi.

In 2018, their father met with an accident which left him permanently bed-ridden. Nitya was married off at the age of 17 so that a son-in-law could help with finances. She failed her class 12 exam as she was pregnant and couldn’t focus on studies. In 2020, the sisters lost their mother to a heart attack, and with that, Aditi also dropped out of school to look after their father. Another year later, once Ayush died, the sisters alleged that they were regularly harassed and assaulted by the accused.

‘I don’t feel safe’

On February 2, the Delhi Women’s Commission issued a notice seeking police protection for the victim and her family.

“I won’t lie, for the first 10 days police personnel stood outside our house all the time, but then they left. They told me to call them if something happens. They come if I need to go anywhere,” said Nitya and added, “I don’t feel safe. I don’t know why they left after 10 days”.

Initially, DCP Sathiyasundaram said that police personnel “are guarding both sister’s houses full time”. Asked why the police were no longer guarding Nitya’s house, he said, “We don’t know where she lives?”. When told that the police, according to Nitya, were present for the first 10 days, he said, “Well it is on need basis. She can call us anytime and we will go there.”

Since the protection was not court mandated, it does not fall under the Delhi witness protection scheme, 2015. Under this scheme protection can be modified only after a review of threat assessment, which also involves consulting the witness. In this particular case, the DCP said “a threat analysis report is not required”.

Meanwhile, in Kasturbanagar, where Aditi lives with her father, three policemen guard the house 24 hours. Nitya has been able to visit her sister once after the incident. “They say the security situation is not okay but she had not met papa for two months, so she came home last week for half an hour,” said Aditi.

‘A tawa, an auto and their penis’

“It’s funny right, the things you remember in terror? I recall a few things so clearly, a tawa (fry pan), an auto and their penis,” said Nitya, and paused. On January 26, when the accused allegedly abducted and pushed her into the auto, Nitya said she had a fair idea about what could happen.

“Ever since Ayush died, these people had been threatening me that they would shave my hair, blacken my face and parade me in public. They kept saying they will make sure I never look beautiful again…So when they grabbed me that day, I thought ‘today is the day’. I just wanted them to get done with it.”

The accused began cutting Nitya’s hair in the auto itself; according to reports, Nitya’s hair was found in the auto during investigation. She was later shoved into a small room in Kasturbanagar, where the accused used to live. It was here that men and women tonsured her – locks of hair was found lying on the floor when this reporter visited the spot on January 27.

Nitya recalls seeing a black frying pan in the corner of the room, next to a box of kajal. “It was like they had planned it all. After everything, before taking me out on the street, the women rubbed their hands on the tawa and slapped it on my face. Next they smeared kajal on my face.”

But what broke her was the sexual assault, she said. “I was so exhausted from all the beating that I wasn’t aggressively fighting back. I think this provoked them. They wanted me to resist everything,” she said.

Nitya does not recall who unzipped themselves first. “When I briefly opened my eyes…they were putting their penis on my face. They kept forcing me to open my mouth and pushed it into my mouth.”

Amid all this, a woman allegedly started fingering and pinching Nitya’s vagina. “I can’t remember who it was. She did not take off my pants but her hand was on my vagina and she was fingering and pinching it very hard.”

“I don’t have an appetite anymore. I can barely sleep for two hours at a time. I get panic attacks and start sweating very often. I keep telling myself not to think about my life,” said Nitya. “It’s not all over just because they’ve been arrested. My life has been arrested forever.”

While the 10-member SIT has prepared a chargesheet, it is yet to be filed in the Karkardooma court, confirmed the DCP. According to a report by Indian Express, during the probe, the team found five video clips of the attack which were recorded by the accused on their phone, the victim’s hair from the auto in which the accused abducted her, and a trimmer and scissors used to cut the hair.

*Names of the victim and her family members changed to protect identity.