Home > India: Child Victim Being Forced Meet Incest Accused in the Name of Law

India: Child Victim Being Forced Meet Incest Accused in the Name of Law

by Concerned Citizens Against Incest - Open-Publishing - Thursday 30 January 2014
1 comment

Protection of Witnesses, Protection of the Child: how can a judge rule against both?

A tribunal in Bangalore will open the case of Mr P Mazurier, early February after several delays. Mr Mazurier is accused of rape and incest on his then 3 and a half year old daughter.

After 18 long months of investigation against the accused, the tribunal found that there were sufficient evidence for doing so.

Mr Mazurier after a short term in prison was released on bail. The terms of the bail is that he would not approach his wife and children, who are considered witnesses in the case (Protection of witnesses).

He already once breached the terms of the bail on Christmas day, when he came to the doorstep of their house, accompanied by local police, demanding to see the children. So far the court has not taken action against him for this breach.

Moreover, preventing a father accused of incest to approach the child-victim is a standard procedure in such cases, the world over (Protection of the child). The conflicting emotional state (fear, guilt, love, anguish) in which such a confrontation puts the child-victim is well documented by psychiatrists and it is highly dammaging for the child.

The paternal grand mother of the three children of the accused put in a request for visiting rights that was granted by the Family Court on July 20 2013: visits were to take place for one hour under the supervision of the Director or Deputy Director of the Mediation Center in Bangalore, and in the presence of the mother of the children (this for the reason that the conversation is taking place in French and neither the Director nor the Deputy Director speak French – while the mother does). One such visit already took place, while the second could not take place, due to the unavailability of a mediator on the specific date.

The grand mother and the father immediately took legal action and a judge fixed the next visiting date: 31 January 2014 Friday at 5.30.

“The complaint’s mother is permitted to see her grand children at Mediation Center, , either in the presence of Director or deputee Director, Mediation Center, on 31.1.2014 at about 5.30 pm for one hour as ordered by the family court on July 20 2013”

However, the judge also ordered that not just the mother, but her counsel, then also the father and his counsel be present ! This not only violates the terms of the bail benefitting the accused, but it also gravely endangers the child’s rights to be protected from the person legally accused to be the perpetrator of the crime committed against her, a perpetrator whose trial is to open shortly in about two weeks time.

“It is made it clear that the complainant and his counsel so also the respondent and her counsel shall also be present to avoid unpleasantness.”

But this is not an ordinary family dispute over visiting rights ! This is a criminal offense of rape and incest that we are talking about !!!

We are most surprised to see how children’s rights are being overlooked by the judge , as well as how the terms of a bail order are ignored.

Journalists, children’s rights activists, bar associations and the Minister of Justice should expose this contradiction between two court rulings and insure that the child’s rights to protection are given priority. They should take action so that the court order should be amended before the time of the visit, so as to comply with bail order provisions.

The grand mother’s visit tomorrow should not be an occasion to put a now 5 and a half year old girl into an emotional turmoil highly damageable for her mental health, that may impede her recovery from trauma.

Text of Bangalore court order - Dec 2013

Forum posts

  • Have been hearing of this terrible instance of child sexual abuse from time to time; the whole thing seems so strange. Is no panel or board on child abuse involved? Is POCSA (Protection of Children Against Child Abuse Act) not implemented in Bangalore? India is supposed to be a ’child friendly’ country. Why is this little girl’s needs being ignored like this and her life, and that of her mother’s and brother’s too being ruined like this? Any judge should be alert to protect children always. How can he get away with such callous orders? (I am a Mumbai resident and activist)