Brij Bhushan Singh Saran has been accused of sexually harassing women wrestlers (File)
New Delhi:
The counsel for BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh argued on Monday that there is no basis for allegations levelled against the former chief of the Wrestling Federation Of India, or WFI.
He also argued that Mr Singh, an accused in the case of sexual harassment of women wrestlers, only checked the athletes’ pulse rate.
“Without sexual intent checking pulse rate is not an offence,” he said.
Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and Vinod Tomar have been charge-sheeted in a case of sexual harassment, lodged on the basis of complaints by six women wrestlers.
The Oversight Committee was not formed on the basis of any complaint but on the basis of tweets posted tagging the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports and Ministry of Home Affairs, the counsel argued.
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate after hearing the part arguments listed the matter for further arguments on October 19.
Advocate Rajiv Mohan appeared for the BJP MP and argued that on January 18, 2023, the first protest began at Jantar Mantar and on January 19, one of the wrestlers, Babita Phogat, met the Union Minister for Sports.
He further argued that on January 20, 2023, the Sports Ministry and the Home Ministry were tagged on tweets. “Till this time no complaint was filed,” Advocate Rajiv Mohan said on behalf of Mr Singh.
It was stated that on January 23 the Oversight Committee was formed.
“On the basis of the Government of India letter. The report was forwarded to Deputy Commissioner of Police New Delhi,” he said.
The defence counsel further argued that the Oversight Committee’s report is a part of the charge sheet and relies on documents, meaning thereby, it is a relied-upon document. It was supplied to police in pursuance of notice by police, the counsel argued.
“Till its (Oversight Committee) formation, there were no written or oral allegations,” the counsel argued.
On the point of the period of limitation, advocate Rajiv Mohan submitted that there is a difference between offence molestation and sexual harassment.
He argued that the wrestlers were well aware of what sexual harassment is and that the offence of sexual harassment is punishable by a period of three years, which is time-barred after three years.
Therefore to suit their case, the allegations of molestation were added to the complaints. The offence of sexual harassment is punishable with imprisonment of five years, he added.
He also pointed out that the Oversight Committee exonerated the coaches against whom allegations were levelled.
Advocate Mohan further argued that the letter is on record, which shows that the Oversight Committee was formed by the Government of India.
“If I am not exonerated, I am also not implicated in the report of the oversight committee,” Advocate Rajiv Mohan pointed out.
He submitted that the foundation of the allegations is not based on any complaint.
“Since there was no complaint to the Ministry or the Sports Authority of India (SAI), the committee proceeded on the basis of tweets,” he said.
Even after the formation of the committee, no complaint was filed, he added.
It was also submitted that the complainants were summoned their statements were recorded and the proceedings were video recorded. Only two affidavits out of six complainants were filed before the committee.
On the point of breathing pattern checking, the accused’s counsel referred to the statement of one of the witnesses who stated she never saw him (accused) touching any girl in an inappropriate manner. “He used to check the pulse rate,” the accused’s counsel submitted.
“Checking pulse without sexual intent is not an offence,” he added.
On the point of alleged incidents at the WFI Office, the BJP MP submitted, “I never called anyone to my WFI office. The complainant came on her own to confront me.”
As the complainant was not focusing on her game but more on tweets, he added.
“Why should I have checked the breathing pattern without occasion? It was not an occasion at my office to check it. If I was intended to molest, why would I check the breathing pattern by touching the stomach?” he asked.
“There is no mention of a breath test in the affidavit given by a complainant, he added. However, it was mentioned in the complaints,” the counsel argued.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
