Delhi police have recommended dropping of charges of sexual assault on a minor against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, leaving it for the court to determine whether to accept or reject the report or order further investigation.
—
THE Delhi Police on Thursday sought the cancellation of a charge of aggravated sexual assault alleged by a minor against Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) president and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) member of Parliament (MP) Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh.
A report under Section 173 (report of police officer on completion of investigation) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) was placed before Patiala House Court in Delhi reportedly stating that no corroborative evidence was found in the allegations levelled by the alleged minor victim.
A decision on whether to revoke the charge under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) will be taken on July 4, 2023, by a magistrate.
In a meeting with Union sports minister Anurag Thakur on June 7, 2023, protesting wrestlers were urged to pause their protest, on the assurance that a chargesheet would be filed against Singh by June 15, 2023.
“In the POCSO matter, after completion of investigation, we have submitted a police report under Section 173 CrPC requesting for a cancellation of the case based upon statements of the complainant, i.e., the father of the victim and the victim herself,” the Delhi police’s public relations officer (PRO) said.
In the second first information report filed against Singh by six wrestler-complainants, the police today framed charges under Sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage modesty), 354A (sexual harassment), 354D (stalking) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The chargesheet was filed by the Delhi police in Patiala House Court, Delhi. The case will be tried by a special court for MPs and members of legislative assemblies (MLAs) since Singh is an MP from Kaiserganj, Uttar Pradesh. The National Capital Territory of Delhi has two special courts for this purpose at the Patiala House Court complex.
In a meeting with Union sports minister Anurag Thakur on June 7, 2023, protesting wrestlers were urged to pause their protest, on the assurance that a chargesheet would be filed against Singh by June 15, 2023.
“How did he come to know when the chargesheet will be filed?” Former Supreme Court of India Justice Madan B. Lokur wondered during a discussion on the events surrounding the wrestlers’ protest on Tuesday. “Only the investigating officer can make that statement. Nobody else. This indicates that something is happening behind the scenes.”
Case of the minor
Tuesday’s developments happened in the aftermath of the alleged minor victim’s recording of a fresh statement under Section 164 (recording of statements and confessions) CrPC before a magistrate alleging that she was discriminated against by Singh but not sexually assaulted.
The minor’s father has admitted that the family had been threatened and was living in fear. “I changed my statement in court not because of greed but because I was scared … scared for my family, daughter and myself.
“Many lives have changed since we raised the allegations. I have to face society and the people. I was threatened by people whose names I can’t reveal; my family is living in intense fear. If anything happens to me or my daughter, how will we live?” he told The Hindu.
The recording of an additional statement does not imply a withdrawal of a statement recorded earlier. Section 164 CrPC allows a magistrate to record a statement under oath and obtain the signature of a person over the same.
The recording of an additional statement does not imply a withdrawal of a statement recorded earlier. Section 164 CrPC allows a magistrate to record a statement under oath and obtain the signature of a person over the same.
One of the objectives of Section 164 is to deter witnesses from changing their versions subsequently and reduce the chances of a witness turning hostile during the course of the trial.
Aggravated sexual assault on a minor
Singh has been booked under Section 10 (punishment for aggravated sexual assault) of POCSO. The provision prescribes a minimum punishment of five years of imprisonment which is extendable to seven years.
Sexual assault under the POCSO is considered ‘aggravated’ when committed by any of the following class of persons: a public servant, a police officer, a member of the armed forces, a person on the management staff of a hospital, educational or religious institution or any other institution providing services to a child, a relative or any person in a position of trust or authority of a child.
Options before the court
Under Section 173 of the CrPC, as soon as the investigation in a case is complete, the officer in charge of the police station must place a police report before a magistrate empowered to take cognisance of the alleged offence.
The said report contains information on whether any offence appears to have been committed and, if so, by whom; on whether the accused has been arrested and the names of persons who appear to be acquainted with the circumstances of the case, among other things.
One of the objectives of Section 164 is to deter witnesses from changing their versions subsequently and reduce the chances of a witness turning hostile during the course of the trial.
When the report forwarded by the officer-in-charge comes up for consideration by the magistrate and in the opinion of the police no offence appears to have been committed, the magistrate can adopt one of three courses:
- They may accept the report and drop the proceeding;
- They may disagree with the report, stating that there is sufficient ground for proceeding further, take cognisance of the offence and issue a summon or warrant
- They may direct further investigation to be made by the police under Section 156(3) (police officer’s power to investigate a cognisable case).
The above was held by the Supreme Court in Bhagwat Singh versus Commissioner Of Police And Another (1985).
The trial against Singh is yet to commence. Wrestler-complainants and their allies continue to demand his arrest to minimise the possibility of tampering with evidence and intimidation of witnesses.
