|
A woman journalist has approached the Delhi High Court seeking the quashing of an FIR accusing her of making casteist remarks against a police officer, alleging that the case was lodged in retaliation for her complaint accusing the officer of sexual assault.
The journalist, Rosy, has also sought interim protection from arrest and other coercive action while the court considers her challenge to the FIR registered at the Parliament Street police station. Earlier, the Delhi High Court declined to urgently list the matter for hearing on the same day and agreed to hear it on Friday. The plea was mentioned before a division bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma, where counsel for the journalist sought urgent relief against arrest. In her petition, Rosy, an independent reporter, has alleged that she was sexually assaulted by ACP Vivek Bhagat while covering a protest at Buta Singh Chowk on October 3. She claims that she confronted the officer immediately after the alleged incident and lodged a complaint at Parliament Street police station at around 6.30 pm the same day. According to the petition, her complaint was subsequently transferred to the Crime Branch for inquiry. Rosy has contended that despite her cooperation with the inquiry, no FIR had been registered on her complaint when the case against her was registered on October 13. The petition states that Rosy appeared before the Crime Branch on October 8, answered questions during the inquiry and identified the alleged place of occurrence on October 11. She also sought preservation of CCTV footage and police body-camera recordings from the vicinity of Buta Singh Chowk, near Mother Dairy and Agarwal Store, for October 3 between 3 pm and 3.10 pm. Rosy has questioned the timing of the FIR against her, stating that Bhagats complaint was lodged at around 10 pm on October 13 and the FIR was registered at 10.26 pm the same day. She has alleged that the criminal proceedings were initiated to harass and intimidate her and dissuade her from pursuing her complaint against the ACP. The journalist has also alleged that police personnel in uniform and plain clothes visited her residence, made inquiries about her whereabouts from neighbours and pressured them to persuade her to withdraw her complaint. According to the petition, she communicated these allegations to the investigating officer and other concerned police authorities on October 14. Rosy has denied making the casteist remarks attributed to her in the FIR and contended that the allegations do not satisfy the essential ingredients of the provisions invoked against her. The petition also raises legal questions concerning the applicability of the SC/ST Act in the circumstances of the case, stating that she belongs to the Lyngdoh community of the Khasi tribe, which is recognised as a Scheduled Tribe. The FIR invokes Sections 221, 356(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with Sections 3(1)(p), 3(1)(q), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Apart from seeking quashing of the FIR and consequential proceedings, Rosy has requested interim protection against arrest and other coercive action, as well as a stay on further investigation during the pendency of her petition. She has undertaken to cooperate with the investigation and appear before the investigating officer whenever lawfully required. (ANI)
|
