Sign in

Sexual harassment case: 3 applications filed by complainant against Haryana minister dismissed

Sandeep Singh, 37, who is a former captain of the Indian hockey team, was booked by Chandigarh Police on December 31, 2022, on the complaint of a junior athletics coach

Updated on: Jan 7, 2024, 06:50:09 IST
By , Chandigarh
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

A local court on Saturday dismissed three of the five applications filed by a woman seeking different court directions in a case of sexual harassment against Haryana minister Sandeep Singh.

Haryana minister and former captain of Indian hockey team Sandeep Singh appears before a local court in Chandigarh on Saturday. (ANI Photo)
Haryana minister and former captain of Indian hockey team Sandeep Singh appears before a local court in Chandigarh on Saturday. (ANI Photo)

Sandeep Singh, 37, who is a former captain of the Indian hockey team, was booked by Chandigarh Police on December 31, 2022, on the complaint of a junior athletics coach. He had on January 1 given up his sports portfolio.

The first application that has been dismissed was for issuing directions to the Chandigarh Police to supply the copy of the chargesheet, along with complete documents, whether relied upon or not relied upon, by the prosecution, to the complainant.

The second application moved by the applicant sought to impose conditions upon the accused as directed by the court of Rajeev K Beri, additional sessions judge, Chandigarh, vide granting him anticipatory bail vide order dated September 15.

Advocate Siddharth had argued that the conditions had already been applied while granting him bail. As far as going to a foreign country is concerned, it goes without saying that when a person gets anticipatory bail, he/she cannot leave without prior permission.

The third application was moved for taking action against previous landlords of the complaint—Arun Jogi, Pooja Jogi, Prithavi Jogi—and others for revealing the name of the victim/complainant and defaming her in public.

To this Singh’s counsel argued that the complainant had concealed facts from the court, as she had entered into a compromise with the above-mentioned accused in a Panchkula court.