Delhi: Reacting to a documentary on December 16, 2012 gang-rape, which has created a storm, former cop and BJP leader Kiran Bedi said on Tuesday that it has exposed a living reality of a parochial mindset.
Talking to ANI, Bedi said, “Its exposing the mind of the rapist, we have never publicly known the why.”
She added, “It has exposed a living reality of a parochial mindset which looks at women as biological property.”
She also tweeted, "Prevention must come before detection and prosecution of crimes. And how do we plan prevention without being aware of root causes of crime?"
Prevention must come before detection and prosecution of crimes. And how do we plan prevention without being aware of root causes of crime?
— Kiran Bedi (@thekiranbedi) March 3, 2015
With a documentary on December 16, 2012 gang-rape creating a storm, an internal inquiry of the Home Ministry has found that permission for taking the interview by a British filmmaker of a rape convict was granted by the ministry in July 2013, which lawyers consider "contravention" of jail manuals.
While granting the permission, the Home Ministry put the conditions that the rapist has to give his consent for the interview and the Tihar jail authorities will watch the raw footage of the film and give its consent before its telecast.
Sources said even though rape convict Mukesh Singh gave his consent for the interview, the Tihar jail officials apparently did not go through the raw footage of the documentary which is said to be 16-hour long, as per PTI.
Besides, there were correspondence between film-maker Leslee Udwin and the Home Ministry in February 2014 when it was informed that the documentary had been sold to a foreign TV channel.
Udwin was said to have conveyed that the raw footage of the documentary was with her and anyone from the Tihar jail or Home Ministry could watch it.
However, sources said, there was no initiative on the part of either the Home Ministry or the Tihar jail to watch the documentary.
Delhi High Court lawyer MS Khan said that the jail manual permits and regulates the meetings of prisoners with outsiders but it does not allow a personal video interview of an inmate.
In the interview, Mukesh said the women who went out at night had only themselves to blame if they attracted the attention of gangs of male molesters.
"A girl is far more responsible for rape than a boy," he had said.
Mukesh also said that had the girl and her friend not tried to fight back, the gang would not have inflicted the savage beating, which led to her death later.
Meanwhile, Delhi Police today registered an FIR in connection with a controversial interview of the convict in the December 16 gang-rape case while also saying that it would move court to seek a restrain order its airing.
Although nobody has been named in the FIR, Delhi Police Commissioner BS Bassi maintained that the "main actor" is the person who has made these assertions and urged the media not to broadcast any assertion which transgresses the domain of law.
"This was a ghastly crime. One has to take into consideration that reporting of a crime does not transgress the domain of law and if that happens then the law will have to take its own course," he told reporters here.
The FIR was registered under IPC sections 505 (Statements conducing to public mischief), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) 505(1)(b) (With intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public), 509 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) and section 66A of the IT Act (Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service) at the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police.
Asked against whom the FIR has been registered, Bassi said, "We have registered an FIR on the basis of media reports and we will investigate and whosoever would will be found guilty we will take action against them."
Any assertion where the late victim is being maligned or where threat is being issued to women in general transgress the domain of law. We are going to move our court concerned for a restraint order, he added.
With PTI inputs