For the best experience, open
on your mobile browser.

Brij Bhushan Singh Case: Delhi Court Fixes May 10, For Passing Of Order On 'Framing Of Charges'

07:01 PM May 07, 2024 IST | NEWS Desk
brij bhushan singh case  delhi court fixes may 10  for passing of order on  framing of charges
Brij Bhushan Singh Case: Delhi Court Fixes May 10, For Passing Of Order On 'Framing Of Charges'

New Delhi [India]: The Rouse Avenue Court on Tuesday again deferred the pronouncement of order on 'framing of charges' against former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in the sexual harassment case lodged against him by six women wrestlers.

The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Priyanka Rajpoot said, that the order is in the final stage but some editing work is pending, because of which the date of May 10 is being fixed.

On April 26, the same court dismissed an application moved by BJP MP Brij Bhushan seeking further investigation into the case, claiming he was not in the country when the alleged sexual harassment took place on September 7, 2022. Singh claimed that he was not in Delhi on the said date but was in Serbia.

Singh had also placed on record the Call Detail Record of coach Vijender in relation to an alleged incident in the WFI office in New Delhi.

Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Atul Srivastav earlier submitted that if something has not been argued by defence counsel, it is not the fault of the prosecution. APP submitted that on analysis of CDR, it was found that the location of the coach was in the same area where the WFI office is situated.

Advocate Rajiv Mohan appeared for Brij Bhushan. He argued that the victim went to Bulgaria in August 2022. Thereafter, she went to WFI in September 2022.

"On September 7, 2022, the coach was in WFI office. On that day I was not in India. Counsel for the accused submitted that as per Delhi police the CDR was corroborating the incident. But the CDR is not filed. If it is filed, the travel documents become important," the advocate said.

The complainant's counsel submitted that it is a "delaying tactics", adding that "if the CDR is such important, that could be asked for earlier."

He further submitted that the victim fairly said that she didn't remember the exact date, but the incident happened at the WFI office. "We can file a reply."

The Delhi Police filed the chargesheet against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and Vinod Tomar on June 15 last year. It stated that both the accused are chargesheeted for trial 'without arrest' as they have complied with the directions u/s 41A CrPC by joining the investigation.

The chargesheet was filed under sections 354, 354 (A), 354 (D) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Accused Vinod Tomar allegedly aided/facilitated the commission of the crime. Accordingly, he is being forwarded for trial under section 354, 354 (A), 109 and 506 of the IPC.

The 1599-page chargesheet in the case, has statements of 44 witnesses recorded under CrPC 164.

Delhi Police in the chargesheet also submitted several pictures including the picture clicked during the events.

The Delhi Police chargesheet stated that based on the "investigation so far," of the complaints by six top wrestlers, Singh was "liable to be prosecuted and punished for offences of sexual harassment, molestation and stalking."

The chargesheet stated that witnesses in the matter have mentioned that they also saw the "physically wrong gesture" of the then WFI president.

This case was lodged on a complaint lodged by women wrestlers.

In the wrestlers' matter, two FIRs were registered against Brij Bhushan Singh on the basis of the wrestlers' complaints.

One was registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and a cancellation report has been filed in this case of a minor wrestler.

Delhi Police officials had said that in the FIR registered by the wrestlers, "after completion of investigation, we are filing a chargesheet for the offences under sections 354, 354A, 354D of IPC against accused Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and for offences under sections109, 354, 354A, and 506 of IPC against accused Vinod Tomar before the Rouse Avenue Court.

Tags :