Charges framed against Brij Bhushan in harassment case
NEW DELHI: The Rouse Avenue Court on Friday ordered the “framing of charges” on sexual harassment allegations levelled by several women wrestlers against former WFI Chief and BJP leader Brij Bhushan Singh and one other accused.
The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Priyanka Rajpoot while passing the order said there is sufficient material against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh to proceed with the sexual harassment of five women wrestlers and with the offence of outraging the modesty of women.
The court found sufficient material to proceed against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh under sections 354 and 354 A (IPC). Charges have also been framed against him under section 506 (part 1) on the allegations of two women. However, the court discharged Brij Bhushan from the allegations made by the sixth wrestler, said the court.
The court also framed charges against the second accused Vinod Tomar under section 506 (part 1) of the IPC on the allegation of one woman and discharged him with the rest allegations made against him. The court has now listed the matter for official framing of charges on May 21.
Recently the same court had dismissed an application moved by the BJP MP, seeking further investigation and placing of a Call Detail Record of a coach. Brij Bhushan had sought a direction to place on record the CDR of coach Vijender concerning an alleged incident at the WFI office in New Delhi.
Singh claimed that he was not in Delhi on the said date. He was in Serbia on September 7, 2022.
The Delhi Police chargesheet filed against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and Vinod Tomar 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 further stated that based on the investigation so far, Brij Bhushan Singh was “liable to be prosecuted and punished for offences” of sexual harassment, molestation and stalking.
A 1599-page chargesheet in the case, having statements of 44 witnesses and six statements was recorded under CrPC 164.