No rape in Murugha Matha POCSO case? Chitradurga cops await forensic report

The report is expected to be submitted along with the additional charge sheet before the court, police sources from Chitradurga told South First.

The first FIR was registered against Shivamurthy Sharanaru on 26 August last year.

The alleged victims — two minor girls aged 15 and 16 — were taken for medical examination on 28 August to the Chitradurga District Hospital, where samples were collected in separate bottles and sent to the RFSL.

The samples included various items of clothing, nail clippings, and some bodily swabs and smears.

Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) KB Nagaveni told South First about the progress in the case: “The provisional medical report was submitted way back in the last week of October, along with the preliminary charge sheet. The investigating officer (IO) has not submitted anything in court after that, including the FSL report.”

He added: “I am unsure if the IO has received the FSL report, but the FSL report has definitely not come before the court.”

The provisional report

The provisional medical examination was carried out on the minors by the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) of the Chitradurga District Hospital.

“As per the history given by victim, there was physical and sexual assault. However, there are no external injuries indicating repeated sexual assault. However, the final report depends upon RFSL report,” the CMO stated in the provisional medical report that was submitted along with the 694-page preliminary charge sheet on 27 October.

The charge sheet was against the Murugha Matha chief pontiff and two others — hostel warden Rashmi and co-accused Paramashivaiah.

It might be recalled that the second FIR was registered against Shivamurthy Sharanaru under POCSO Act sections and sexual assault on four other minor girls, including two sisters, on 13 October.

The mother of the sisters, who worked as a cook at the Murugha Matha, was the complainant in the second case.

Deccan Herald on Wednesday, 4 January, reported that medical examinations found no rape in the Murugha Matha case.

The medical examination report of two minor girls who accused Murugha Matha seer Shivamurthy Sharanaru of rape has concluded that there was no sexual penetration and their hymen was intact, according to documents submitted to the court, the report said.

However, the IO in the case — Deputy Superintendent of Police (Chitradurga sub-division) Anil Kumar — told South First that no one had concluded that there was no sexual assault, and no one had submitted any documents stating that there was no rape.

“It was a provisional medical examination by doctors at Chitradurga District Hospital who had examined the victims and recorded their observations — which is subject to change after the RFSL report emerges. We have still not received the RFSL report and we are awaiting it,” Anil Kumar told South First.

Meanwhile, Chitradurga Superintendent of Police Parashurama K told South First: “An intact hymen does not rule out penetrative sexual assault. The provisional medical report was submitted initially by the government doctors who examined the victims. We are awaiting the FSL reports to include the charges and file the additional charge sheet.”

A ploy to help the accused?

Founders of the NGO Odanadi Samsthe, KV Stanley and ML Parashuram, have alleged that the provisional medical report was included in the charge sheet to sow seeds of doubt.

This, they said, was done so that the accused could secure bail on the basis of this doubt.

“A responsible government doctor saying that the seer had heart ailments and required treatment and that he needed to be shifted to Bengaluru turned out to be a lie,” Stanley told South First, referencing an apparent effort to get the Murugha Matha chief pontiff out of prison.

“It is not surprising that the CMO of the District Hospital in Chitradurga could conclude everything in the provisional medical examination report, stating that the victims’ hymens were intact,” he added.

“They are creating doubt in the mind of the court based on a provisional medical examination that was done two and half months ago so that the accused would secure bail. In POCSO cases, the statement of the victims stands strong under CrPC Section 164,” Parashuram pointed out.