A 16-year-old girl left her home early in the morning of 23 February. Her mother thought her daughter was going to study tuition. At 6:26 am, she entered the Janajagaran Community Forest in Birendranagar-4, walking with a boy of her own age (whom she considered her boyfriend). Little did she know that she was taking the last steps of her life. Inisha Bik, a student of class 11 at Usha Kindergarten School, did not return alive. Three hours after entering the forest via the road to the Karnali Province Ayurvedic Hospital, her body was found in a corner of the forest at 9:30 am. A black jacket was draped over the body, and shoes and socks were off. Blood was visible on the clothes and the surrounding ground. The post-mortem report states the cause of death as ‘excessive bleeding due to a deep injury to the internal genitalia.’ Such injuries, which are consistent with forced sexual intercourse .’ Arbin Shakya, a senior forensic officer at Bheri Hospital Nepalgunj, who conducted Inisha’s postmortem, said, ‘It appears that the contact was made in an extremely violent manner .’ Inisha was only 16 years, 7 months and 18 days old at the time of her death .

Her alleged boyfriend (who was named ‘Birendranagar P’ by the police while prosecuting the case because he was a minor) was arrested at the same time, while the next day, three more people – ‘Birendranagar Dha’, ‘Birendranagar Na’ and ‘Birendranagar F’ – were taken into custody by the police. All except ‘Birendranagar F’ were in the same class as Inisha . All the accused are between 16 and 17 years old . A case has been registered against all four in the Surkhet District Court

for gang rape and murder under the Criminal Code, 2074 BS. Life imprisonment has been sought for each of them . If convicted, a minor can be sentenced to a maximum of 16 years and 8 months, as the punishment is two-thirds of that of an adult. The 41-page charge sheet filed by the District Attorney's Office on March 15 includes a list of 163 pieces of evidence. When studying this charge sheet and examining the evidence included, it appears that the public prosecutor has not been able to present sufficient evidence against the other three people except 'Birendranagar P'. The police had recommended charging 'Birendranagar P' with rape and murder and the remaining three with only reaching the scene of the crime and not playing a role in saving Inisha, but the public prosecutor's office has demanded action against all four for gang rape and murder. The Surkhet police themselves say - 'There is not enough evidence for that.' 000

What do the witnesses say?

The charge sheet includes statements from 33 people, including the four accused. The main defendant, ‘Birendranagar P’, has stated that he and Inisha were lovers and that he called his friends to rescue her after she fainted due to excessive bleeding during sexual intercourse in the forest. He has stated that he is solely responsible and that he did not involve the other three people. After the friends arrived, they refused to touch her for fear of being ‘caught’ and then sent ‘Birendranagar Dha’ to call the villagers. He has stated that the three friends were not present at the scene at the time of the incident.

The three people have also mentioned details in their separate statements that are consistent with the statement of ‘Birendranagar P’. They have stated that when they reached the scene for rescue after calling, they saw Inisha already unconscious. Their statements are consistent with each other and also consistent with the statement of ‘Birendranagar P’ that they were not there when the incident occurred.

The first witness to reach the spot, apart from the accused, forest watchman Ram Bahadur Damai, said that at around 9:30 am, when one of the accused, ‘Birendranagar Dha’, came to the forest and said that a friend was unconscious in the forest and needed to be rescued, he called the villagers and said that he reached the forest and when he reached there, he saw the main accused ‘Birendranagar P’ sitting near Inisha’s body wearing a blood-stained shirt, and two others, ‘Birendranagar N’ and ‘Birendranagar F’ standing on the other side carrying a bag. Other witnesses have also given statements of a similar nature. When asked how the incident happened, many witnesses have said that they knew that ‘Birendranagar P’ had committed the incident. They have not directly accused the other three. The statements of many other witnesses included in the charge sheet also did not mention the details of the other three raping Inisha. Some have only said that they heard that there was a gang rape. Inisha's relatives in particular have said that they have heard that all four people must have raped and murdered her.

Father Indra Bahadur, who came to Nepal after the news of his daughter's death, said that 'the incident has been made mysterious'. He said, 'The report has also shown normal, it is not known what investigations have been carried out. I am starting to worry that my daughter will not get justice.'

There is also concern on the streets of Surkhet that Inisha will not get justice. The movement that started demanding justice for her has been divided for the last three days. One group is demanding justice for Inisha, demanding strict punishment for all four accused, while another movement is being held on behalf of the three accused, demanding justice for them. A family member of 'Birendranagar Pa' says, 'The three people except the main accused had not even reached the forest at the time of the incident.'

000

What does the evidence say?

The Central Investigation Bureau (CIB) of Nepal Police has submitted a report by aggregating CCTV footage available at various places in Surkhet and call detail records between the people allegedly involved. The report included in the charge sheet shows a detailed account of what the accused did that morning at what time.

The charge sheet mentions the main accused ‘Birendranagar P’, aged 16 years and 8 months, as Inisha’s lover. He had sent a WhatsApp message to Inisha at 4:32 am, ‘Good morning my love.’ An hour and five minutes later, at 5:37 am, he is seen walking alone towards Mangalgadhi Chowk, carrying a bag. Then at 6:01 am, he sent another WhatsApp message to Inisha in English, ‘I am waiting.’

At 6:19 am, the CCTV of the State Health Supply Management Building showed the two of them walking together with Inisha. At 6:26 am, the CCTV of the Karnali State Ayurveda Hospital recorded a video of them walking towards the Janajagaran Community Forest. Inisha was found dead in the same forest after some time.

But the call detail records and location details of the other three accused ‘Birendranagar Dha’, ‘Birendranagar N’ and ‘Birendranagar F’ show that they were nowhere near the scene of the incident till 9 am. The main accused ‘Birendranagar P’ initially called ‘Birendranagar Dha’ at 8:21 am. Both told the police that ‘Birendranagar P’ had called ‘Dh’ to ask for help in rescuing Inisha after she fainted due to excessive bleeding during sex. The conversation lasted for 76 seconds. According to the CIB report, the location of the mobile phone at that time shows ‘Birendranagar P’ at the scene of the incident and ‘Birendranagar Dh’ around his house. The CIB report states that ‘Birendranagar Dh’ is heard saying ‘Where is he, why is he in the alter?’ on the phone at 8:34 am. 29 minutes later, at 9:03 am, he was seen leaving the house on a scooter on the CCTV of the house, and at 9:07 am, he was seen going alone from the gate of Karnali Province Ayurveda Hospital towards the scene of the incident, according to the CIB.

Thus, among the remaining three accused, ‘Birendranagar Dha’, who was the first to reach the scene of the incident, also appears to have reached there only at 9:07 PM. It appears that the main accused ‘P’ had a conversation with the remaining two ‘Birendranagar N’ and ‘Birendranagar F’ only five minutes before that. At 9:02 PM, ‘P’ had called ‘N’ and had a 79-second conversation. In the statements given by both to the police, it is mentioned that ‘P’ had asked for ‘N’s help in rescuing Inisha in the said phone conversation. The main accused has not spoken to ‘Birendranagar F’ in this entire case. It is mentioned in the statements of all three that after ‘P’, the cousin’s son, who had come to stay at his house only the previous evening, set out to rescue Inisha as per the request of his friend, ‘F’ went along with his brother to support him. The CIB report shows the two men walking towards the incident site from the gate of Karnali Province Ayurveda Hospital at 9:11 am, according to the CCTV footage at Karnali Province Ayurveda Hospital.

In the timeline established in the charge sheet, the main accused 'Birendranagar P' was with Inisha at least at 6:19 am. The other three people approached the incident site only after 9:07 am. Inisha's body was found at 9:30 am.

After 18 days of investigation, the police have recommended that 'Birendranagar P' be charged with both rape and murder and the remaining three with murder only, said District Police Chief, Superintendent of Police Sudhir Raj Shahi. However, after the police report, the District Public Prosecutor's Office has charged all four with gang rape and murder. District Attorney Karna Bahadur Mahat said that the police report was incomplete and that they have filed the same nature of case against all four. ‘The medical report mentions that only one person raped her. Then why was it recommended to file a case against the other three youths for manslaughter?’ Mahat asked, ‘If there was no involvement in the rape, how did they get involved in taking her life?’ Mahat said that serious questions have also been raised about how such a serious injury to the genitals could have been caused by only one person raping her.

Police Chief Shahi said that the report prepared after various stages of investigation, including on-site inspection, has been submitted to the Government Attorney’s Office. ‘It is not mandatory that a case should be registered only on the basis of the investigation we have done,’ he said, ‘It seems that the Government Attorney has registered a case in court based on the complaint.’ Chief Shahi said that if there are any shortcomings in his report, the Government Attorney’s Office has the right to raise questions about it. ‘The government prosecutor’s office has the right to ask what is incomplete in the investigation, but why was that not asked,’ he said, ‘We have only investigated the incident, we are not in a position to distinguish between justice and injustice. The government prosecutor has the right to decide how to frame the case, and the court will ultimately evaluate it.’

The list of evidence in the indictment also includes the results of the polygraph test of all four accused. In the polygraph report of the main accused received by Kantipur, the person who prepared the report concluded that his statement that no one other than him was involved in the incident was false.

What happens now?

The Surkhet District Court on Tuesday ordered the four accused to be sent to a juvenile correctional home for trial. The four will have to spend time in a correctional home in Nepalgunj, about 100 kilometers from their homes, until the final verdict in the case is announced. However, they will still be able to appeal the decision to remand in the High Court and the Supreme Court. Remand is not evidence of involvement in the crime, which reflects the district court's view that it is necessary to keep them in custody until the case is resolved.

The samples collected from the body of the deceased and the crime scene have been sent for DNA testing. Viscera and bioserological tests are also being conducted. The results of those tests are not yet available. The results will provide important evidence to determine whether Inisha was gang-raped or not.

However, before the results are available, the public prosecutor has charged all four with gang rape. The final decision on whether the other three accused, apart from the main accused, are innocent will be made through the judicial process. And, for that, the test results that have not yet been received will serve as important evidence. If the DNA test shows that all or some of them gang-raped Inisha, the public prosecutor's claim will be further strengthened. If not, the lack of evidence in the charge sheet will be the basis for the defense of the three accused. Family members of the three youths have claimed that the government prosecutor's office has tampered with the case. Nawaraj Dhakal, the uncle of one of the youths, objected to the government prosecutor's office registering the case, ignoring the report prepared by the police based on the investigation. 'What kind of justice is it that a case of rape and manslaughter is registered despite the fact that there is ample evidence and evidence that our minor sons went to help their friend?', he asked. Now, how can the government prosecutor, who has set aside the police report that the three men reached the scene only after the incident and charged them with gang rape, defend his decision based on the limited evidence available now?