HC issues notice to Delhi Police, victim in Kumar Vishwas assault case
The Delhi high court on Tuesday issued a notice to Delhi Police in Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Kumar Vishwas’ case wherein a party volunteer accused him of molesting her, besides issuing a notice to the volunteer as well.delhi Updated: Mar 22, 2016 17:36 IST
The Delhi high court on Tuesday issued a notice to Delhi Police in Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Kumar Vishwas’ case wherein a party volunteer accused him of molesting her, besides issuing a notice to the volunteer as well.
Justice Sunita Gupta issued the notices and posted the matter for hearing on July 21 after police stated they had not found any evidence to substantiate the allegations.
“The complainant made the complaint, but there is no proof. For us no cognisable offence is made out. She has been changing her stance everywhere,” the police said.
An FIR was registered against Vishwas last week at Sarojini Nagar police station under directions from a trial court for the alleged offences under Sections 354A (sexual harassment) and 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code. Both these offences are punishable up to one year imprisonment.
In a hearing on March 16, a trial court said that the complaint against Vishwas of making “sexually coloured” remarks and “advances” towards the woman required investigation, and directed police to file a first information report (FIR). Vishwas however filed a plea challenging the trial court order, and sought to quash it, claiming the allegations were baselsess.
At the time, the police had informed the magistrate court that they had not found any evidence to justify a criminal case.
Appearing for the AAP leader, senior advocate HS Phoolka questioned the “unprecedented over-enthusiasm” shown by the metropolitan magistrate in ordering the FIR for a bailable offence despite the police stating there was no evidence to support the allegations that were made last year.
Vishwas countered the woman’s claims stating he never “called or invited the complainant to his political meetings or stage programmes”, but the woman “herself chased the petitioner (Vishwas) at every spot”.