4 min readNew DelhiApr 21, 2019 01:48 AM IST
First published on: Apr 21, 2019 at 01:46 AM IST
When the matter came up for hearing on Saturday, the woman’s lawyer Vijay Kumar argued that the prosecution had not provided them with an annexure and necessary documents required to frame their arguments. The court listed the case for hearing later in the week.
A cheating case lodged against the woman, who has levelled allegations of “sexual harassment and consequent victimisation” against Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, came up before the Patiala House Courts on Saturday, and was eventually listed for further hearing for
April 24.
Delhi Police has moved to cancel the woman’s bail, claiming that the Haryana-based complainant — who has alleged he paid her Rs 50,000 for a job in the Supreme Court — was being threatened by the woman and her husband. The FIR was registered on March 3, 2019.
“We had registered an FIR against the woman… and the case was subsequently transferred to Crime Branch. They are investigating the matter further,” said DCP (New Delhi) Madhur Verma.
The complainant’s application in the case stated, “I have been receiving threatening phone calls since I filed a cheating case against the woman. There have also been instances where I have been followed. I think they are doing this to scare me.”
When the matter came up for hearing on Saturday, the woman’s lawyer Vijay Kumar argued that the prosecution had not provided them with an annexure and necessary documents required to frame their arguments. The court listed the case for hearing later in the week.
The woman, in a sworn affidavit, has alleged that after she was allegedly sexually harassed on two occasions, the “consequent victimisation of her and her family” started.
Explained | Glare on CJI Ranjan Gogoi, all eyes on how SC responds
She has alleged that a “false and frivolous” cheating case was registered against her on March 3. The woman also alleged that following the FIR, she and her husband were taken to Tilak Nagar police station, where she was subjected to “physical and verbal abuse”.
DCP Verma denied her allegations, and said there are several CCTV cameras inside police stations.
At the home of the woman’s youngest brother-in-law, her defence counsel claimed that she and her husband “have briefly lost contact with the family… They have gone underground as anything can happen”.
“Chhe mahine se ummeed kar rahe hain ye humein baksh denge… Mere viklaang bete ko naukri dilwa ke humne aafat mol li hai (We have been hoping for relief for six months… we invited trouble by getting our disabled son a job),” said the woman’s mother-in-law, referring to the woman’s claims that the “CJI used his discretionary quota to appoint” her “disabled brother-in-law at the SC in 2018”. In the affidavit, the woman claimed that he was “terminated without giving any reasons in January 2019”.
The brother-in-law, who was suspended as head constable by Delhi Police earlier this year, alleged, “I had complained to my superiors about a gambling racket in the area mid-2018, and in 2019, I was told a departmental inquiry has been set up to probe my role in the racket.”
When asked about the brother-in-law’s allegation, a senior police officer said that the SHO in-charge had filed a report last year about “the man’s (head constable’s) connivance with a gambling racket in the area”.
When the matter came up for hearing on Saturday, the woman’s lawyer Vijay Kumar argued that the prosecution had not provided them with an annexure and necessary documents required to frame their arguments. The court listed the case for hearing later in the week.
Share
