Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
New Delhi, Nov 1 (IANS) Nagina MP and Azad Samaj Party (Kanshi Ram) president Chandrashekhar got a big relief on Saturday as a Delhi court rejected a plea by a woman doctor seeking direction to Delhi Police to register a case against the politician for alleged sexual harassment.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Neha Mittal rejected Dr Rohini Ghavri’s application seeking direction to the SHO, PS-IGI Airport, New Delhi, to register an FIR in the case.
ACJM Mittal said, “This Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant/complainant has not complied with the mandatory provision of Section 173(4) BNSS. As a result, the present application is not maintainable and is, therefore, dismissed.”
Switzerland-based Dr Ghawari alleged that the accused committed several heinous crimes against her, including repeated sexual harassment under false promise of marriage, criminal threats, voyeurism, stalking, fraud, misuse of technology and threats to her life and dignity.
The doctor alleged that in October 2021, upon her first visit to India, the accused took her to Pullman International Hotel, Aerocity, New Delhi, where against her will and consent, she was raped and kept confined in the hotel for several hours under the false promise of marriage.
She alleged that she lodged her complaint at Police Station-IGI Airport, New Delhi, but the police failed to register an FIR and instead her complaint was transferred to PS-Parliament Street.
Dr. Ghawari said in the application given in the court that not taking action on the part of police officers is negligence in their duty.
Dismissing his plea, the court said, “A perusal of the application under section 175(3) BNSS and the affidavit attached thereto shows that the complainant has nowhere claimed that after the inaction of the concerned police station, he approached the DCP with his complaint.”
ACJM Neha Mittal said, “This is a mandatory requirement for filing an application under section 175(3) BNSS. The complainant has to not only state the facts/allegations of the case on oath but also specify that he/she had approached the police authorities under sections 154(1) and 154(3) CrPC/173(4) BNSS.”
“The complainant has to state on oath not only the facts/allegations of the case but also that he had approached the police authorities under sections 154(1) and 154(3) CrPC/173(4) BNSS,” the court said.
The court said, “The claims regarding compliance with Section 154(3) Cr.P.C./173(4) BNSS are missing in the present application. Thus, neither any claim has been made in the present application regarding compliance with Section 173(4) BNSS nor has any complaint been sent to the concerned DCP before September 3, 2025 (the date of the affidavit).”
–IANS
rch/and