New Delhi, March 24 -- The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Gurugram police commissioner to appear before it on March 25 with the complete record of investigation into the alleged sexual assault of a four-year-old girl at a condominium in the city, expressing shock at the "insensitivity" shown by the police and the manner in which the child was further traumatised during the probe. The incident reportedly involved two housemaids and their male associates. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi said it was compelled to take stock of the investigation, and indicated it may constitute a special investigation team of senior women police officers. The court also signalled that the trial may be shifted to another court after serious concerns were raised about how the magistrate recorded the child's statement. "The most shocking thing is your police officer asking the parents 'what do you want?' When someone comes to you with a complaint of this kind, isn't your duty to register an FIR immediately? Have you forgotten the first principle of law?... and this is the state of affairs in a metro city?" the court asked the state. The observations came during a hearing on a petition seeking a court-monitored probe into the incident, where two housemaids and their male associates are accused of sexually assaulting the minor. Appearing for the victim's family, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi told the court that "the more I get to know about the matter, it gets more and more serious," alleging a "complete dereliction of duties" by both the police and the magistrate. He pointed to a series of actions that violated basic safeguards under child protection laws and compounded the trauma of the victim. The bench questioned the delay in arrests, noting that action was taken only recently. Rohatgi responded that despite the FIR being registered over a month ago, there had been little progress in the probe until the matter was brought before the apex court. The court was particularly disturbed by the manner in which the child's statement was recorded. Rohatgi submitted that the minor was repeatedly called to the Child Welfare Committee over the past month and questioned in absence of her parents. He alleged that the accused were physically presented before the child for identification, rather than following legally prescribed procedures. "What kind of insensitivity is the police showing?. How can you treat a four-year-old child like this? Traumatise her further?" the court remarked. While the Haryana government maintained that steps had been taken, the court directed the Gurugram police commissioner and the investigating officer to remain present on the next date with the entire case file. It also asked the state to furnish details of three senior women police officers, indicating that an SIT could be formed. The court ordered the father's affidavit be kept in a sealed cover and forwarded to the district and sessions judge, Gurugram, seeking comments from magistrate on the contentions about the recording of child's statement. The case had first come up before the SC on March 20, when Rohatgi sought urgent listing, alleging that despite the FIR registered in February for offences under the POCSO Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the police had failed to collect crucial evidence or make arrests. Within a day of the mention, Gurugram police arrested the three accused....