Latest news with #DelhiCourt
News18
27-05-2025
- Politics
- News18
‘Had Trust In Lord Hanuman, Judiciary': Ex-WFI Chief Brij Bhushan Singh On POCSO Case Closure
Last Updated: A Delhi Court on Monday accepted the closure report filed by the Police for cancellation of sexual harassment case filed under POCSO against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. Former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and ex-BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh on Tuesday expressed happiness after Delhi's Patiala House Court on Monday accepted the cancellation report filed by the Police in a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) case against him, saying that he had a lot of trust on Lord Hanuman and judiciary. While speaking to the reporters in Ayodhya, Singh said, 'I have great faith in Lord Hanuman and myself… When allegations were levelled against me on January 18, 2023, I said it was a lie… Everything I said turned out to be true… The sections that were imposed to prevent harassment are being misused today… I have great faith in the judiciary." #WATCH | Ayodhya, UP | On the Delhi Court closing the POCSO case against him, former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and BJP leader, Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh says, '…I have great faith in Lord Hanuman and myself… When allegations were levelled against me on January… — ANI (@ANI) May 27, 2025 He further emphasised that several sections that were imposed to prevent harassment are being misused today. A Delhi Court on Monday accepted the closure report filed by the Police for cancellation of sexual harassment case filed under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act by a wrestler against the former WFI chief. 'Cancellation accepted," Additional Sessions Judge Gomti Manocha said. Singh had appeared before the court during the proceedings, while the complainant was also called to record and verify statements in the case. On May 17, the court had summoned the complainant wrestler, who had accused Brij Bhushan of sexual harassment when she was a minor. The Delhi Police had previously filed a cancellation report in June 2023 after the victim withdrew her statement. During court proceedings on August 1, 2023, the complainant and her father expressed satisfaction with the police investigation, and had not opposed the closure report in the case. The police had recommended dropping the POCSO case against Singh, but charged him with sexual harassment and stalking in a separate case lodged by six women wrestlers. The police had recommended the cancellation of the complaint involving the minor wrestler, saying 'no corroborative evidence" was found. The FIR on the accusations made by the minor wrestler was filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, along with relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) concerning the act of outraging modesty. However, the father of the minor wrestler later stepped forward and claimed that he had filed a 'false" complaint of sexual harassment against Brij Bhushan. The father alleged that his actions were driven by anger and frustration over the WFI Chief's perceived biased treatment towards his daughter. First Published: May 27, 2025, 16:56 IST
News18
26-05-2025
- Politics
- News18
Delhi Court Accepts Closure Report In Ex-WFI Chief Brij Bhushan Singh POCSO Case
Last Updated: Delhi Court Accepts Closure Report In Ex-WFI Chief Brij Bhushan Singh POCSO Case A Delhi Court on Monday accepted the closure report filed by the Police in a sexual harassment case filed by a minor wrestler against former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and ex-BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. Watch India Pakistan Breaking News on CNN-News18. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated!
The Hindu
23-05-2025
- The Hindu
Right to privacy: Delhi court rejects Army officer's plea seeking hotel's CCTV footage to confirm wife's extramarital relationship
New Delhi A Delhi Court on Thursday (May 22, 2025) rejected a plea filed by an army officer seeking CCTV footage of a hotel to confirm allegations of his wife's extramarital relationship with another army officer. The officer, who was involved in a marital dispute with his wife and had initiated divorce proceedings, claimed that she had visited a hotel in the National Capital Region with the other army officer. His plea sought directions to the hotel to provide booking details and CCTV footage of the common areas. Civil Judge Vaibhav Pratap Singh of Patiala House dismissed the plea of the army major, who also sought a mandatory injunction against the hotel. The court observed that the release of such private information without affording those involved an opportunity to defend their privacy would be a violation of their right to natural justice, adding that it would also lead to reputational harm. '…. the right to privacy and to be left alone in a hotel would extend to the common areas as against a third party who was not present there and has no other legally justifiable entitlement to seek the data of the guest. Same would hold good for the booking details.' The court noted that even the Indian Parliament had given its imprimatur to this jurisprudence when, while doing away with the colonial penal law, it enacted the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and did not retain therein the offence of adultery. '..... the modern day Bharat has no place for gender condescension and patriarchal notions,' it added. The court noted that the hotels owed a duty of confidentiality to their guests and were required to protect the privacy of their records, including booking details and CCTV footage. Commenting on the applicant's motive to seek the information, the judge noted that courts were not meant to serve as investigative bodies for private disputes or instruments for the collection of evidence in internal proceedings, especially when no clear legal entitlement to that evidence existed. 'The Army Act, 1950 and the extant Rules framed thereunder provide specific procedures for handling complaints and presenting evidence, and the Plaintiff must take the remedies thereunder to call witnesses et al. The Court cannot, therefore, be used to bypass or supplement these internal mechanisms. In the absence of a compelling case that the Plaintiff does not have an alternate efficacious remedy, he is not entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of a Civil Court to seek an injunction,' it added.
NDTV
20-05-2025
- NDTV
Woman Sues Husband For Defamation Over Adultery Charge. What Court Ruled
New Delhi: A Delhi Court has recently declined cognisance of a defamation complaint filed by a woman against her husband. The man had filed a divorce petition in Karnataka on the grounds of cruelty and adultery. While declining cognisance, the court observed, "A crucial element for completing the offence of defamation is that the imputation (allegation) must have been made with the requisite mensrea (intention) to cause harm to the reputation of the concerned person." A woman had alleged that her husband had falsely alleged in the divorce petition that she was having an affair with her gym trainer, used to meet her secretly, used to invite him to their house in the absence of the accused and used to frequent hotels with him. It was further alleged that during cross-examination in the divorce proceeding, the husband could not substantiate his allegations and failed to justify the ground of adultery. As per the admitted case, the divorce was eventually granted in the matter on the ground of cruelty. Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Yashdeep Chahal refused to take cognizance of the complaint. "I have no hesitation in observing that the version of the complainant fails to disclose the ingredients and nexus necessary for proving the offence of defamation against the accused herein, and thus, no prima facie case is made out for taking cognisance. Accordingly, cognisance is declined under Section 223 of BNSS and the complaint is disposed of," JMFC Chahal said in the order passed on May 16. The court also pointed a finger towards making Delhi a jurisdiction for filing a complaint. "It is also apparent from how the cause of action has been created in Delhi. To keep the pot boiling is a method which the Courts must be circumspect about. I need not say more," JMFC Yashdeep Chahal said. The complainant had alleged that when she was in Delhi to meet her friend she was having the affidavit filed by her husband. Her husband caught hold of the affidavit and read it. Her friend asked her the question about the allegations. She alleged that the false Allegations levelled in the affidavit defamed her in the eyes of her husband. The court also said that it has been observed by the Constitutional Courts, time and again, that the tendency to misuse the criminal machinery for settling monetary/civil scores must be nipped in the bud. " Without expressing much, I may only note that the prayer on behalf of the complainant to keep this complaint pending, for no reason whatsoever, till settlement talks are going on outside the Court, only points in the direction alleged by the accused to keep the pressure points on," the judge observed. The couple got married on 28.04.2008. As the relationship went sour, the accused husband filed a divorce petition in 2020 before the Family Court in Bengaluru. In the said petition, the husband filed his affidavit of evidence wherein, the accused pleaded for divorce on the twin grounds of cruelty and adultery. To substantiate his ground of adultery, the accused allegedly levelled certain allegations against the complainant.
Time of India
30-04-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Delhi Court grants interim protection to Gensol's Puneet Jaggi, orders 7-day notice before arrest
New Delhi: A Delhi Court has granted interim protection to Puneet Jaggi , promoter of Gensol Engineering Ltd. , directing the Delhi Police to serve a seven-day prior notice in case it decides to arrest him in connection with alleged economic offences currently under enquiry. #Pahalgam Terrorist Attack The groundwork before India mounts a strike at Pakistan India considers closing airspace to Pakistani carriers amid rising tensions Cold Start: India's answer to Pakistan's nuclear threats While granting interim relief, Additional Sessions Judge Kiran Gupta stated on Tuesday that since the applicant has demonstrated 'reasons to believe' that he may face arrest if an FIR is filed, the investigating officer must provide a seven-working-day advance notice before proceeding with the arrest, subject to necessary approvals after FIR registration, if any. The order was passed despite no FIR being registered, reaffirming the legality of seeking pre-FIR anticipatory relief. 5 5 Next Stay Playback speed 1x Normal Back 0.25x 0.5x 1x Normal 1.5x 2x 5 5 / Skip Ads by by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Google Brain Co-Founder Breaks His Silence: Read These 5 Books And Turn Your Life Around Blinkist: Andrew Ng's Reading List Undo Jaggi's petition cited the Standing Order of the Delhi Police, which mandates prior approval from the Special Commissioner before arresting any individual in economic offences involving more than Rs3 crore. He also sought a right of hearing before any arrest, citing procedural safeguards enshrined in the circular. During the hearing, the public prosecutor opposed the petition, calling it premature. It was submitted that two complaints -- one of Rs600 crore (dated April 22) and another of Rs800 crore (dated April 24) -- had recently been received, but no FIR had yet been registered. The prosecution argued that in the absence of an FIR, the plea for anticipatory relief was not maintainable. Live Events Advocate Ayush Jindal, appearing for Jaggi, countered that apprehension of arrest can arise even at the preliminary enquiry stage, and legal remedies cannot be denied solely due to the procedural stage. "Just because no FIR is registered does not mean the applicant should be left remediless. He is fully cooperating with the enquiry. The protection sought is not against investigation, but against sudden coercive action," Jindal submitted. It was argued that the applicant has already participated in the investigation conducted by the Directorate of Enforcement under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) and has extended full cooperation throughout. Notably, on April 25, 2025, the Enforcement Directorate carried out a search operation at the applicant's residence located at 706 A, Camellias, DLF Golf Course Road, Gurugram - 122002, during which the applicant was present and cooperative. While certain electronic devices were seized, no other incriminating material was recovered, indicating that the applicant poses no risk of evading investigation or tampering with evidence. He further emphasised that the police must follow their own standing order, and any arrest made without complying with it would be arbitrary and unlawful. Jindal also noted that Puneet Jaggi had no involvement in the company's finances, which were exclusively managed by his brother. "My client had no role in financial decisions or management at GensolEngineering Ltd.," he stated. Taking note of the submissions, the court directed the Delhi Police to provide a seven-day advance notice before taking any coercive step against Jaggi. The order ensures that the applicant has adequate time to seek appropriate legal recourse, if required.
