If not exonerated, then also not implicated by Oversight committee, argues Brij Bhushan's counsel

New Delhi [India], February 7 : The Rouse Avenue court on Wednesday heard part arguments on the framing of charges by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in a sexual harassment case.
Singh is accused of sexually harassing women wrestlers during his tenure as Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) Chief.
It was argued that the Oversight committee was formed by the Government. The counsel argued that if Singh has not been exonerated by the committee he was also not implicated by the committee.
After hearing part of the arguments on behalf of the accused, Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Priyanka Rajpoot listed the matter for further arguments on February 16.
Advocate Rajiv Mohan along with Rishabh Bhati and Rehan Khan appeared for Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh.
Advocate Rajiv Mohan argued on behalf of Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. He submitted that the oversight committee (OC) was formed by the government under the provision of the Protection of Women from Sexual Harassment (PoSH) Act.
It was also argued that it had recorded the statement in connection with allegations levelled by the complainants.
The statement recorded before the OC are previous statements, advocate Rajiv Mohan argued. He also argued that there were contradictions in the statement of a complainant about the time and place of the incidents.
On the last date, it was argued that there was a delay in reporting of the alleged offences. It is also contended that contradictions in the affidavit and statement of complaint.
Counsel Rajiv Mohan had argued that there was a long delay in reporting the alleged offences. The incidents of 2012 and thereafter were reported to the police in 2023.
The statement given before the Oversight Committee can't be brushed aside, advocate Rajiv Mohan had argued.
Counsel for the accused also argued that the alleged incident took place at different times and places. There is no link between the incidents. It was argued that women wrestlers started their protest on January 18, 2023 in New Delhi.
On January 23, the Over sight committee was formed by the government. It filed its Report on April 5. On April 21, 2023, six complaints were filed at Connaught Place Police Station. On April 28, the FIR was lodged.
"There is no link in the complaints. The Time and place are different but allegations are against one person, the counsel argued. There is no connection among the complainants," he added.
It was also contended that the requirement for invoking Section 354 IPC is criminal force and assault. This section was added as it is punishable with five years and it is not time barred.
On the point of jurisdiction, the accused's counsel submitted that the offences committed in Delhi can be tried by this court and not the offences that happened outside Delhi and India.
On the point of delay, he contended that the reason for delay was stated by one of the Complaintants that her career was at stake, therefore she kept silent. She was awarded Arjun Award in 2016. Rajiv Gandhi Khel Ratan in 2021.
Advocate Rajiv Mohan argued that before the Oversight committee, no incident of 2016 was mentioned. The incident mentioned in the Complaint is from 2015 in Turkey. Incidents in Mongolia from 2016 were reported in 2023 in Delhi.
It was also argued that Coach Kuldeep had recommended action against the complainant in relation to indiscipline. The accused had taken action against her, he said.
He also argued that the information was concealed by the complainant.
"You concealed that you were not allowed to play in 48 kg category as your weight was found more than it. You alleged sexual harrasment as I (accused) took disciplinary action against you," the counsel argued.
He also pointed out the lacunae in the statement related to the incident of Mongolia as hotel name is not mentioned. "In Turkmenistan, you did not participate in the qualifying tournament," he said.
"There's a reason behind the allegations and the protests. Can we simply start the trial on the basis of whatever documents the prosecution submits?" the counsel argued.
On the point of continuity, he argued that the Mongolia incident is 206, WFI offence is separate from the Mongolia incident.
"Without sanctions under 188, this case can't continue. You have to show the connecting link between the offences," he said.
"There is a time limitation and chargesheet should have been filed within three years of the offence," counsel Rajiv Mohan submitted.
There must not be a large time gap to concoct a false story. If you take a long time before complaining, he said.
"The committee was constituted under the government order. The statement recorded there can not be brushed aside," the counsel argued.
Delhi police had filed a charge sheet against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and Vinod Tomar. The court had taken cognizance of the charge sheet. The court is hearing arguements on framing of charges afresh.