Tuesday: The Rouse Avenue court in New Delhi has become the focal point of a significant legal proceeding involving BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, as it prepares for a crucial clarification session on March 15 regarding the framing of charges in a sexual harassment case. Stemming from allegations made by six women wrestlers, the case has ignited a complex legal debate over the nature and continuity of the alleged offences.
Delhi Police, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Atul Srivastava, have put forth a compelling argument advocating for the interconnectedness of the offences across the complaints. They suggested the potential for consolidating six First Information Reports (FIRs) to streamline the trial process, emphasizing the procedural efficiency and the shared elements among the incidents. Srivastava stressed,
“There is sufficient material to frame charges against the accused persons,”
underscoring the prosecution’s belief in the strength of their evidence.
Contrastingly, the defense, led by Advocate Rajiv Mohan, alongside associates Rishabh Bhati and Rehan Khan, has vehemently disputed the prosecution’s claims of commonality and continuity. Mohan argued,
“There was no commonality and continuity of the offences. Therefore, no single FIR can be lodged in six FIRs,”
challenging the basis for consolidating the cases into a unified charge sheet.
The legal battle has delved into the intricacies of the allegations, with Mohan highlighting inconsistencies in the complainants’ accounts, particularly regarding the time and location of the alleged incidents. He pointed out the significant delay between the occurrences and their reporting, noting,
“Incident of 2012 and thereafter reported to the police in 2023.”
This gap, according to the defense, undermines the credibility of the charges and complicates the legal proceedings.
Further complicating the case is the defense’s scrutiny of the Oversight Committee’s (OC) findings, established under the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (PoSH) Act. Mohan contended that the statements recorded before the OC, deemed as previous statements, revealed contradictions that could not be ignored. He argued that the discrepancies, especially concerning incidents abroad and disciplinary actions taken against the complainants, cast doubt on the uniformity and validity of the allegations.
As the court, led by Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Priyanka Rajpoot, gears up for the upcoming clarification, the legal teams continue to present their nuanced arguments. The defense’s challenge to the jurisdiction, the timing of the complaints, and the procedural validity underlines the complexities of this high-profile case.
The wrestling community and the broader public remain keenly interested in the outcome, as the court’s decision on the framing of charges will significantly impact the trajectory of this contentious trial. The allegations against Singh have not only stirred the sports world but have also raised pertinent questions about accountability, justice, and the intricacies of legal procedures in cases of sexual harassment.
Also Read- Investor Group Approaches NCLT Bengaluru Against Byju’s Alleging Mismanagement (lawchakra.in)
