Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

Former Wrestling Federation of India Chief and BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh on Saturday last week urged a Delhi court to "discharge him" in the sexual harassment case lodged by six female wrestlers. He claimed contradictions in the statements of prosecution witnesses.

Advocate Rajeev Mohan, on behalf of Singh, submitted that the accused also claimed that, as per the law, the oversight committee formed to look into the case, had to recommend the registration of the FIR within seven days.

He contended that "since in the matter at hand, no such recommendation had been made, it was safe to assume that the Oversight Committee did not find a prima facie case against the accused".

“Since no prima facie case was found out by the Oversight Committee, and since no case was found out, no FIR was registered, and since no FIR was registered, it automatically amounts to exoneration”, the counsel told Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Harjeet Singh Jaspal of the Rouse Avenue Court.

The counsel for the defence argued that the statements made before the Oversight Committee and the statements recorded under Section 164 CrPC had material contradictions and that 'the statements made later in time (under Section 164) had material improvements and, therefore, were liable to be rejected in toto.

“Since there are material contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, that itself calls for discharge of the accused, as the contradictions have the effect of taking the case away from the arena of grave suspicion, towards only mere suspicion”, the counsel argued.

However, the arguments were opposed by the Additional Public Prosecutor. He contended that the very constitution of the Oversight Committee was not in accordance with Section 4 of the POSH Act, and therefore it could not be said that it was an ICC for the purposes of the Act. “Secondly, there is no question of exoneration because no recommendations or findings have been given by the said committee", he submitted.

Taking note of the submissions, the court listed the matter for further consideration on October 30, 2023.

Notably, on July 20, the court “granted regular bail” to the BJP leader. Earlier, on July 18, the ACMM had granted 2-day interim bail to the outgoing WFI chief. The court had also granted interim bail to Vinod Tomar till July 20. Singh and Tomar had been granted bail on a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 each. 

It is to be noted that the court, on July 7, observed that there was sufficient evidence to proceed against the accused and issued summons for Singh and Tomar. 

The Delhi Police filed a chargesheet against Singh on June 15 under Sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 354A (sexual harassment), 354D (stalking), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC. 

Tomar was charged with offences under Sections 109 (abetment of any offence, if the act abetted is committed in consequence, and where no express provision is made for its punishment), 354, 354A, and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC.

Notably, in April, seven wrestlers moved the Supreme Court seeking the registration of an FIR against Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) President and BJP MP Brij Bhushan Singh over allegations of sexual harassment. A CJI Chandrachud-led bench issued notice to the NCT of Delhi in the plea. The Apex Court also allowed the petitioners to submit additional documents before it in a "sealed cover" in the case.

The top court then directed the Commissioner of Police (Delhi) to adequately assess threat perception with respect to the alleged minor girl victim in the Wrestling Foundation of India (WFI) sexual harassment case and thereafter make necessary security arrangements.

Case Title: State v. Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh