E-Paper
Guj HC orders probe into Bulgarian woman’s rape allegations against Cadila CMD
The Gujarat High Court has overturned a magistrate court's dismissal of a Bulgarian national's complaint accusing the chairman of Cadila Pharmaceuticals of rape and sexual harassment. The court has ordered an investigation into the matter and criticized the police for their alleged lack of action. The woman joined the company as a flight attendant in November 2022 and later accused the chairman of sexual harassment and rape in February 2023. She was fired after making her complaint.
The Gujarat High Court on Friday set aside a magistrate court’s dismissal of a Bulgarian national’s complaint accusing Rajiv Modi, the chairman and managing director of Ahmedabad-based Cadila Pharmaceuticals, of rape and sexual harassment. The court has directed a senior IPS officer appointed by the state DIG (Law and Order) to investigate the matter.
A company spokesperson when contacted declined to comment on the matter.
Justice H D Suthar quashed a magisterial court’s order rejecting the 27-year-old woman’s application for an FIR and directed the magistrate to order an investigation under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The judge observed irregularities in the magisterial court’s process, as despite the woman making allegations that were cognizable, the court had rejected her complaint by shifting the burden of proof on to her instead of asking police to investigate.
The High Court called out police officials, including a deputy commissioner of police and Sola police inspectors R B Solanki and J B Agrawat, for their alleged lack of action. The woman has accused a Mahila police official and the Sola police inspectors of inaction.
As per the case details, the Bulgarian woman had joined the pharmaceutical company as a flight attendant in November 2022 and was later made to work as a butler/personal assistant to Cadila Pharma’s CMD. She accused Modi of sexual harassment and rape in February 2023. She said that she was fired after making her complaint.
The Bulgarian national asserted that she approached the city police with a complaint of rape and sexual harassment against the businessman, but no FIR (first information report) was filed.
Having initially sent her complaint to the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) and the city police commissioner, who subsequently forwarded it to Mahila police station (West) on April 9, the woman, feeling the police did not take appropriate action, unsuccessfully approached the magisterial court.
The rejection by the magisterial court was based on the woman’s previous “compromise” with the company, which she did not disclose in her court complaint, and the magistrate noted a lack of substance and evidence in her allegations.
Subsequently, she filed a petition in the High Court, seeking an FIR for rape, sexual harassment, and criminal intimidation against CMD Modi and another person involved in her recruitment. Additionally, she called for charges against the police officials for their alleged inaction.
The woman’s advocate, Rajeshkumar Mishra, argued that the police not only suppressed her complaint containing cognizable charges but also coerced her into signing a settlement affidavit.
The court acknowledged Mishra’s contention that the police accepted the woman’s settlement affidavit regarding her salary payment, which did not pertain to her allegations of sexual assault. This was highlighted as the woman never revisited the dispute about her service conditions.
The state government defended the police officials and termed the woman’s petition before the HC ‘a proxy litigation at the behest of disgruntled elements. It was alleged that the woman was giving criminal colour to a private dispute between employer and employee, but the judge was not convinced.
The HC noted the “surprising and disturbing fact” that the magistrate took cognizance of the complaint but asked her to produce evidence. “Though the magistrate was duty bound to conduct the inquiry independently considering the nature of the allegations, he did not follow the proper course of law,” the HC said.
